Preamble

The House nest at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Tyne Improvement Bill [Lords].

To be read the Third time To-morrow, at half-past Seven of the Clock.

Oral Answers to Questions — DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE (AIR SUB-COMMITTEE).

Mr. MANDER: 1.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when the Air Sub-Committee of the Disarmament Commission is to meet, and who will be the British representative?

The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir John Simon): As regards the first part of the question it is for the chairman of the committee or the officers of the conference to take the initiative in summoning the committee and I understand that no date has yet been fixed. As regards the second part of the question my right hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Air has been nominated to represent His Majesty's Government on the committee.

Mr. MANDER: Are the Government hopeful of useful results from the sittings of this committee?

Sir J. SIMON: I cannot say at present. The committee has been called together, and we are hoping that it may contribute very useful results.

Sir HERBERT SAMUEL: Is it intended that the committee shall consist mainly of representatives of the Air Forces of the different Powers, or is it intended that other Ministers not directly concerned with these forces should attend?

Sir J. SIMON: No, Sir, the composition of a committee to deal with a number of technical matters naturally would in-
clude, and does in fact include, the representatives of the Air Ministries of a number of Powers, but there are representatives of various kinds.

Mr. MANDER: Would it not be desirous to send some Minister who is interested in disarmament?

Oral Answers to Questions — GERMANY (BRITISH JOURNALISTS).

Mr. MANDER: 2.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the official statement by Dr. Goebbels, the German minister of propaganda, in his national broadcast, that British journalists in Germany have been guilty of methods of deliberate and systematic poisoning of public opinion, he will make representations on the subject to the German Government and inquire what is referred to in this grave reflection on British subjects?

Sir J. SIMON: I consider that the reputation of British journalists stands sufficiently high for it to be superfluous to make representations to the German Government on this matter.

Mr. MANDER: Is not the real truth that they have told the facts only too clearly and truthfully

Lieut.-Colonel Sir ARNOLD WILSON: Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the views of Dr. Goebbels are to some extent shared by many responsible Englishmen long resident in Germany?

Mr. MANDER: Is he aware that there are very few in this country?

Oral Answers to Questions — PASSPORTS AND VISAS (HUNGARY).

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: 4.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that a Hungarian visa is no longer required for the passports of British tourists visiting that country; and whether the British Government is extending reciprocal treatment to Hungarian visitors to Great Britain?

Sir J. SIMON: His Majesty's Government have been informed by the Hungarian Government that for the period 1st May-30th September this year the visa obligation would be suspended in
favour of British subjects from the United Kingdom proceeding to Hungary. While His Majesty's Government much appreciate the action of the Hungarian Government in this matter, they regret that they are unable at present to reciprocate as, for financial reasons, it is not possible to conclude any further visa abolition agreements in present circumstances.

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: Would my right hon. Friend consider, in the interests of tourist traffic to this country, giving this temporary respite in regard to British visas?

Sir J. SIMON: I really do not think that the matter to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers interferes with tourist traffic with Hungary, which, I am glad to say, is substantial. It is a purely temporary arrangement made from the 1st May last to 30th September. I think that any suggestion in the middle of July that we should make some other arrangement is not practicable.

Oral Answers to Questions — ROYAL NAVY.

OIL FUEL.

Mr. LAMBERT: 5.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what proportion of oil fuel for the Navy is stored on the South-Eastern and Southern Coast; and whether steps have been taken to prevent any paralysis of the Navy if any considerable proportion of such storage was destroyed by air or other attack?

The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Sir Bolton Eyres Monsell): It is not in the public interest to give the information asked for in the first part of the question. My right hon. Friend may rest assured that the Admiralty is fully alive to the possibility of attacks from the air or otherwise, and that measures of defence are under constant consideration.

Mr. LAMBERT: Is it possible to defend these areas from hostile air attack?

Sir B. EYRES MONSELL: I think my right hon. Friend will agree that that is an impossible question to discuss at Question Time.

OFFICERS' RETIRED PAY.

Mr. JOHN (for Mr. EDWARDS): 6.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will furnish a return showing the number of ex-naval officers in receipt of pensions other than War pensions; the average amount of pension per head; and the number of such pensioners who are in paid employment while in receipt of their pensions?

Sir B. EYRES MONSELL: I would refer the hon. Member to pages 272 to 277 of the current Navy Estimates, upon which will be found information as to the numbers of retired Naval and Marine Officers in receipt of retired pay from Navy Votes, and the provision made for their retired pay for 1934. The average rate of retired pay per head is about £308 a year. I regret that no information is available which would enable the last part of the question to be answered.

Oral Answers to Questions — AVIATION.

HEAVY-OIL ENGINES.

Mr. CHORLTON: 12.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether any application of heavy-oil aero-engines has been or is immediately contemplated for large flying boats to enable, by reason of their higher economy, the possibility of longer flights being made?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for AIR (Sir Philip Sassoon): Yes, Sir; a test is being arranged.

Mr. CHORLTON: 13.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether he will consider special attention being given to the use of high-economy heavy-oil aero-engines, using fuel of low cost, to civil mail aeroplanes to enable the postal air-service to be greatly and economically increased?

Sir P. SASSOON: Special attention is being given to the development of such engines; their application to mail carrying aircraft will no doubt follow when their efficiency, reliability and economy in operation have been proved.

Mr. CHORLTON: When are we to receive a little more detailed information of the progress which is being made?

Sir P. SASSOON: The hon. Gentleman knows that progress is very slow.

Mr. CHORLTON: 14.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air the number of types of aero-engines using heavy oil as a fuel that are now available for installation or already in use in the Royal Air Force or civil aircraft?

Sir P. SASSOON: The answer is that two such types of aero-engines are available, but they must still be regarded as being in the experimental stage.

Oral Answers to Questions — ROYAL AIR FORCE.

SERVICE PENSIONS.

Mr. T. SMITH: 15.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether he will furnish a statement showing the number of ex-Air Force officers in receipt of pension other than war pensions; the average amount of pension per head; and the number of such pensioners who are in paid employment while in receipt of their pensions?

Sir P. SASSOON: In answer to the first part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the Air Estimates, 1934, pages 181 and 182, in which he will find the required information. The answer to the second part is £260 a year. I regret that the information asked for in the last part of the question is not available.

NEW AERODROMES.

Rear - Admiral Sir MURRAY SUETER(for Captain HAROLD BALFOUR): 9.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air the approximate time taken by the Air Ministry from the selection of a site for a new aerodrome to the date when a station is sufficiently completed for occupation by personnel and aircraft under the normal rate of peacetime expansion?

Sir P. SASSOON: It is difficult to give a general figure, there being necessarily considerable variation in the periods taken to complete new stations. I am advised, however, that the period would normally be not less than four years.

DOMINION AIR FORCES (INTERCHANGE OF OFFICERS).

Sir M. SUETER(for Captain BALFOUR): 10.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air the number of Royal Air Force officers attached to Dominion air
forces throughout the Empire; the total number of officers of Dominion air forces attached to the Royal Air Force; and if it is planned to extend this interchange in numbers and range of duties?

Sir P. SASSOON: Three officers of the Royal Air Force are at present serving with Dominion air forces on interchange with officers of those forces. A further such interchange has been arranged and will take effect in the near future. In addition, three Royal Air Force officers are serving on special duty with 'the Indian Air Force. Apart from interchanges, four officers of Dominion air forces are undergoing the course at the Royal Air Force Staff College, Andover, five Dominion officers are undergoing courses of instruction at Royal Air Force units, and three. Dominion liaison officers are attached to the Air Ministry. My hon. and gallant Friend may rest assured that advantage will be taken of every suitable opportunity of extending the system of co-operation.

REGULATIONS (OFFICERS ON LEAVE).

Sir M. SUETER(for Captain BALFOUR): 10.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air if he is aware that Royal Air Force officers on leave are being engaged on certain civil air-lines as unpaid pilots; that these officers transport fare-paying passengers; and if, in view of the fact that this practice must deprive civilian pilots of opportunities for remunerative employment and that it is not a purpose for which leave is granted, he will take steps to have this practice prohibited forthwith?

Sir P. SASSOON: I am not aware of the practice to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers; if he will furnish me with particulars of any case which he has in mind, I will consider whether the regulations require any strengthening.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRANSPORT.

ONE-WAY TRAFFIC.

Major BEAUMONT THOMAS: 18.
asked the Minister of Transport whether, in view of the successful establishment of one-way traffic in Berkeley Square, he will take steps to establish one-way traffic in other squares in Loudon where the traffic is equally heavy?

Sir WALTER WOMERSLEY (Lord of the Treasury): I have been asked to reply. The question of introducing roundabout working in London squares is kept constantly under review by the London and Home Counties Traffic Advisory Committee in the light of traffic developments. The system is established in cases where it is considered that it will effect some definite improvement in traffic conditions.

Major THOMAS: Is my hon. Friend aware that this body to which he has referred moves extraordinarily slowly?

Sir W. WOMERSLEY: Yes, and I am also aware that my hon. Friend is doing his best to expedite matters as much as possible.

PARKING REGULATIONS.

Major THOMAS: 19.
asked the Minister of Transport whether he will take the necessary steps to ensure that vehicles parking in streets shall only park on one side of the road, as is the custom in many Continental towns?

Sir W. WOMERSLEY: The Councils of counties and the larger towns are empowered to make Orders for unilateral parking subject to confirmation and many such orders have in fact been made.

ROAD PASSENGER VEHICLES.

Major THOMAS: 20.
asked the Minister of Transport whether, in view of the risks run by persons descending from passenger vehicles in the middle of the road, he will issue instructions that in future all passenger vehicles, such as tramcars and omnibuses, shall be fitted with some form of gate which will prevent persons getting on and off except at the authorised stopping places?

Sir W. WOMERSLEY: My hon. Friend, the Minister of Transport, has carefully reviewed the figures of fatal accidents in which have been involved passengers boarding or alighting from tramcars and other vehicles in motion. While he is most anxious to reduce the total of road accidents, to whatever cause they may be attributed, he does not consider that the facts at present before him would justify him in imposing a general requirement of the character indicated.

Mr. HOLFORD KNIGHT: Will my hon. Friend represent to the Minister how necessary it is that some special observation should be made upon this
source of danger to the travelling public, which is very serious in London?

Sir W. WOMERSLEY: My hon. Friend the Minister of Transport has given very great consideration to this matter. He has had a report presented to him which shows that ill 1933 three persons were killed alighting from, or trying to board, motor vehicles. He is certainly giving the matter serious consideration.

Mr. KNIGHT: Along with that matter, will my hon. Friend represent that there should be a special inquiry into the case of Gray's Inn Road, especially at the terminus where the trams draw up, in view of the extreme danger to the public caused by alighting from the trams there?

Sir W. WOMERSLEY: No doubt my hon. Friend will see into that matter.

Mr. ANSTRUTHER-GRAY: Is it a fact that only three persons were killed while either alighting from or getting upon tramcars last year?

Sir W. WOMERSLEY: That is according to the report which the Minister has received from his advisers.

Major THOMAS: How many were injured?

Sir W. WOMERSLEY: I cannot say, but, if my hon. and gallant Friend will put down a question, I am sure that my hon. Friend will do his best to answer it.

ROYAL PARKS (SPEED LIMIT).

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: 25.
asked the First Commissioner of Works the total numbers of offences and convictions for exceeding the speed limit in the Royal parks for the first, six months of this year in comparison with the first six months of 1933?

The FIRST COMMISSIONER of WORKS (Mr. Ormsby-Gore): During the first six months of 1933 the number of motorists prosecuted for exceeding the speed limit in the Royal parks in the Metropolitan Police area was 1,288, of whom 1,287 were convicted. During the corresponding period of 1934, there were 1,115 prosecutions and 1,069 convictions.

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that the existing administration with regard to this question is proceeding satisfactorily?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: Broadly speaking, I think that it is satisfactory. Certainly the number of convictions in comparison with the number of prosecutions shows that they have not been undertaken without good cause.

EDUCATION (SIZE OF CLASSES).

Mr. RHYS DAVIES: 31.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education whether he is now in a position to publish a statement showing, at the latest available date, the number of classes with over 50 pupils on the roll in public elementary schools in each county, county borough, and urban district in England and Wales?

Sir W. WOMERSLEY: I have been asked to reply. My Noble Friend hopes that the statement promised in the reply given to the hon. Member on the 31st May last will be ready for publication in the early autumn.

Oral Answers to Questions — SCOTLAND.

SHERIFF COURT HOUSE, EDINBURGH.

Sir SAMUEL CHAPMAN: 21.
asked the First Commissioner of Works if the plans for the new Sheriff Court House, Edinburgh, have been examined by the Fine Arts Commission for Scotland and the Sheriffs Court Commissioners; and if he has approved of the same?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: The final plans and elevations of the new Sheriff Court House, Edinburgh, have been submitted to the Royal Fine Art Commission for Scotland and to the Sheriff Court House Commissioners, and were approved by these bodies on Monday. They will be published forthwith.

EDUCATION GRANTS.

Mr. LEONARD: 28.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the percentage which the grants payable in each case under the Education. Grant Regulations at present lying upon the Table of the House bear to the net estimated expenditure for the year 1933–34 in each education area in Scotland?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Mr. Skelton): As the answer is in the nature of a tabular state-
merit, I propose, with the hon. Member's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

Education Area and Grants* under the Regulations for 1934–35
expressed as a percentage of estimated net expenditure† for the year 1933–34.



Percentage.


Aberdeen (County)
73.1


Angus
59.7


Argyll
62.7


Ayr
52.7


Banff
74.3


Berwick
59.7


Bute
57.0


Caithness
74.0


Clackmannan
52.4


Dumfries
58.7


Dunbarton
51.3


East Lothian
51.1


Fife
53.6


Inverness
74.9


Kincardine
65.5


Kirkcudbright
57.1


Lanark
56.7


Midlothian
54.4


Moray and Nairn
69.2


Orkney
80.5


Peebles
57.9


Perth and Kinross
56.0


Renfrew
55.7


Ross and Cr[...]marty
77.1


Roxburgh
56.5


Selkirk
58.4


Stirling
54.3


Sutherland
74.9


West Lothian
56.7


Wigtown
66.1


Zetland
88.1


Burghs.



Aberdeen
56.1


Dundee
58.2


Edinburgh
46.1


Glasgow
46.2


* Estimated grants payable under the Education Authorities (Scotland) Grant Regulations, 1934, as amended by the Education Authorities (Scotland) Grant Amendment Regulations, 1934.


† Estimated Net Expenditure from revenue account met by grants from the Education (Scotland) Fund and by rates (including derating grants). Expenditure on "Approved Schools" (Reformatory and Industrial Schools) it is included.


Scottish Education Department, Wednesday, 18th July, 1934.

HOUSING SUBSIDY.

Mr. NEIL MACLEAN: 29.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware that the Corporation of Sheffield was granted the subsidy on 472 houses after it had been decided that no more subsidy was to be paid under
the 1924 Act, and that this was the result of representations made by the Sheffield Estates Committee through the town clerk; and whether, in view of this precedent, he will reconsider his decision not to extend the period of the subsidy to include the houses in Scotland which owing to a trade dispute could not be completed within the higher subsidy period?

Mr. SKELTON: No, Sir. My right hon. Friend is informed that the houses referred to were not approved for subsidy after the date when it was decided that no more subsidy was to be paid under the 1924 Act. With regard to the second part of the question my right hon. Friend is informed that no subsidy will be paid in respect of any of the Sheffield houses if completed after 30th June, 1934. The instance referred to in the question is accordingly not a precedent for extending the date after Which the £9 subsidy can be earned in Scotland beyond 30th June, 1934.

Mr. MACLEAN: Is the hon. Member not aware that members of the Sheffield Corporation have admitted that they were being refused a subsidy, but that, after representations had been made to the Department of Health, the subsidy was extended to cover the extra period required to build the houses?

Mr. SKELTON: The point which is of importance is that the subsidy will not be paid on houses completed after 30th June, 1934. I have given the hon. Member the information at my command, and I would recommend him to ask the Minister of Health if he wants further details.

Mr. MACLEAN: Are we to understand that the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland considers that Scotland is a separate entity in this House, and, that there is to be no communication between the Department of Health for Scotland and the Department of Health for England? In other words, is he under the impression that Scotland has got Home Rule?

Mr. SKELTON: That seems to be rather a large deduction. I am merely referring to the ordinary practice that Ministers should be responsible for matters connected with their own Department.

REGENT'S PARK

Mr. BURNETT: 23.
asked the First Commissioner of Works whether he is yet able to announce his decision respecting St. John's Lodge, Regent's Park, in view of the fact that this matter has awaited the decision of his Department for seven years and the fabric of the building detracts from the amenities of the park?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: As my hon. Friend was informed, in reply to his question of the 10th July, there are several schemes under consideration for using St. John's Lodge, and I am not yet in a position to make any further statement on the subject.

Mr. BURNETT: Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that in its present condition it looks rather like a derelict lodging-house, and cannot he arrange for some paint to be put on the outside of it?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I have already answered that question in the negative.

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: 24.
asked the First Commissioner of Works whether he has under consideration any alterations to Clarence Gate, Regent's Park; and, if so, will he indicate their scope?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: Owing to the congestion of pedestrian traffic at Clarence Gate, I have under consideration a. proposal to widen the eastern footgate immediately, after which, when funds are available, a larger scheme for the general improvement of the traffic conditions at this place will be undertaken.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: 22.
asked the First Commissioner of Works whether his attention has been called to the absence of adequate washing and lavatory conveniences in the botanical gardens of Regent's Park or elsewhere in the vicinity and if he will take steps to have these provided forthwith?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: Yes, Sir, and I have recently approved a scheme for the provision of additional lavatory accommodation in the Inner Circle Gardens, about 80 yards from the Chester Gate entrance, and the work will be carried out this autumn.

BRITISH ARMY (MUNITIONS).

Mr. CLARRY: 26.
asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office, whether, in view of the recommendation of the special industrial commissioner for South Wales, it is proposed to establish a permanent and extensive heavy munition works in that area; and, in that event, will he give consideration to the claims of Newport in regard to transport and other necessary large scale production activities?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Douglas Hacking): I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given yesterday to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for South Cardiff (Captain A. Evans), to which I am unable to add.

Mr. CLARRY: May I assume that the Special Industrial Commissioner has reported, or is reporting, on the lines indicated, that is to say, with the object of transferring large munition works to South Wales?

Mr. HACKING: As I said yesterday, I have no knowledge whatever of a report that has been made by the Commissioner in South Wales.

Mr. THORNE: Is the Minister aware that there is a place called West Ham on the map?

HOUSING (EGHAM).

Mr. THORNE: 30.
asked the Minister of Health whether he can give the House any information about the type of working-class dwelling houses that have been designed and erected by the engineer and surveyor to the urban district council of Egham, Surrey; and if he can state the number of houses to the acre, the floor space per house, and the total cost per type, including sewers, road works, administrative expenses, and every other known charge?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Mr. Shakespeare): I will, with permission, send the hon. Member a statement giving the particulars he desires.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRADE AND COMMERCE.

MERCHANDISE MARIN (CARTRIDGE CASES).

Sir GIFFORD FOX: 32.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether
he is aware that foreign cartridge makers are now sending cartridge cases into this country unprinted and that special machines are printing foreign on the cases after arrival; also that British firms filling these cases are actually receiving duty drawbacks when exporting, with the result that firms which manufacture solely British cartridges are being undercut in the Colonial markets; and whether he will investigate these facts with the object of introducing a change in the Merchandise Marks Act?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Dr. Burgin): The answer to the first two parts of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the Merchandise Marks Act I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given by my right hon. Friend on 10th April to the hon. and gallant Member for Coventry (Captain Strickland).

Mr. DAVID GRENFELL: Is it the case that these unprinted blank cartridges come here without any marking to indicate the country of origin?

Dr. BURGIN: I think that is so.

Mr. GRENFELL: Is that in accordance with the Merchandise Marks Act? Why should they be allowed to come in?

Sir ARTHUR MICHAEL SAMUEL: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that some of these cartridges are printed with English words which may give the impression that they are of English make?

Dr. BURGIN: I am aware of the fact in regard to these cartridge cases, but under Merchandise Marks Act there is certain procedure which has to be followed. There has to be an application by a majority of manufacturers concerned, for an Order. Until that procedure is followed, I am powerless.

Mr. HERBERT WILLIAMS: Is it not the case that where an article bears the name of a British firm on it and does not bear an indication that it is of foreign origin, an offence arises under the Act, and is not the Board of Trade free to initiate a prosecution?

Dr. BURGIN: Perhaps the hon. Member will put all that on the Order Paper.

Sir A. M. SAMUEL: Is there not a misleading implication in the fact that
there are English words on the base of the cartridge case, which gives the idea that they are English made?

Lieut.-Commander AGNEW: Does he Minister consider this an example of fair trade?

Mr. CAPORN: Would it be open to the manufacturers concerned to approach the Import Duties Advisory Committee and ask them to give protection?

Dr. BURGIN: The question and the whole of the supplementaries are directed to the Merchandise Marks Act. I was not considering import duties at all. Under the Merchandise Marks Act there is a recognised procedure, whether applicable to cartridge blanks or anything else, and until that procedure is followed the Board of Trade has no power in the matter.

Mr. THORNE: Is there not a moral obligation on the sportsmen who buy these cartridges to see that they get English instead of Japanese?

NEW ZEALAND (TARIFF REDUCTION).

Sir ROBERT HAMILTON (for Mr. MANDER): 27.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether, in view of the recent reduction of tariffs by the New Zealand Government on British goods, he will take the opportunity of negotiating for a free exchange of commodities between this country and New Zealand?

The SECRETARY of STATE for DOMINION AFFAIRS (Mr. J. H. Thomas): The Government are sensible of the advantages which, as they hope, will arise from the reduction of tariffs on imports from this country which was recently announced in New Zealand, and very much appreciate the spirit of cooperation which they indicate. They do not feel, however, that the general considerations bearing on this question, which I put before the House in the course of the Debate on 7th May, are affected by these changes.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the full details will be published?
Mr. THOMAS: I think the usual practice will be followed.

Oral Answers to Questions — AGRICULTURE.

MEAT ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: 33.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the National Livestock Committee have submitted any reports to him; and, if so, whether such reports are available for hon. Members?

Dr. BURGIN: I understand the hon. Member to refer to the Meat Advisory Committee appointed in December, 1932, under the chairmanship of Lord Linlithgow. It has not been necessary for the committee to submit any informal reports.

Mr. WILLIAMS: Was not this committee appointed to examine the distribution side of meat, and were not reports issued by it to the Department?

Dr. BURGIN: The Department is in very frequent touch with this committee, but ray hon. Friend must not misunderstand the nature of the committee. It is a trade committee, not a consumers' committee. It is a committee to deal with different sections of the trade, under regulations and restrictions. So far as I know, when the committee require any information they communicate with the Department, but that has been formal and not in the nature of a report.

Mr. WILLIAMS: In the course of the inquiries by the committee were not some discoveries made and some submissions made to the Department, and may I ask whether such submissions can be made available for Members of the House?

Dr. BURGIN: Perhaps the hon. Member will allow me to look into that matter, because it goes a good deal further than his question. I should like to consider whether I can in any way assist the hon. Member.

SOFT FRUIT (IMPORT DUTY).

Viscount ELMLEY: 36.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can give an assurance that there will be no alteration in the amount or incidence of the duty on soft fruits during the month of August or subsequently during this year?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Duff Cooper): No, Sir.
My Noble Friend will appreciate that the Government cannot give advance undertakings in regard to these or any other commodities as it is impossible to foresee all the contingencies which might arise.

POLICE (UNIFORMS).

Mrs. COPELAND: 34.
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the weather experts' prophecy of another five years of hot summers, he will consider putting the police into light-weight cool uniforms during the hot weather, especially when on point
duty?

The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Sir John Gilmour): I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave on Monday to the hon. Member for Abertillery (Mr. Daggar).

Sir ASSHETON POWNALL: Does the right hon. Gentleman not realise the importance of those engaged in public duties being suitably dressed during heat waves?

Mr. KNIGHT: Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiry in the city of Nottingham where police officers on point duty are allowed to dispense with their tunics but are required to wear white gloves?

GOLD IMPORTS.

Mr. POTTER: 35.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the total value of gold imported into this country from foreign countries during the past year to the most convenient date and the comparative figures for the two previous years; and whether the deposit of such gold here is having any prejudicial effect upon the Exchange Equalisation
Fund?

Mr. COOPER: My hon. Friend will find full particulars of the imports and exports of gold coin and bullion during the:first six months of the years 1932, 1933 and 1934 respectively,,in the trade accounts of the United Kingdom for June, 1934. For reasons with which the House is familiar, I am unable to answer questions relating to the Exchange Equalisation Account.

INCOME TAX.

Mr. ANSTRUTHER-GRAY: 37.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury when the report of the Income Tax Simplification Committee will be published?

Mr. COOPER: The committee hope to complete the preparation of the draft of a Bill in the course of the present year. When the Bill is complete they will immediately proceed with the compilation of their report.

Mr. MACQUISTEN: Will the hon. Member consider suspending the payment of Income Tax until it has reported?

NAVAL CONFERENCE.

Lieut.-Commander TUFNELL: 38.
asked the Lord President of the Council whether it is proposed to arrange for any preliminary conference between representatives of the Dominions and Colonies in order to obtain agreement with regard to Imperial policy prior to the forthcoming Naval Conference?

The LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL (Mr. Baldwin): Communications with other parts of the British Commonwealth with regard to the forthcoming Naval Conference are proceeding through the normal channels; in addition my hon. and gallant Friend may be assured that His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom will take any suitable opportunity that may offer prior to the conference, to supplement these communications by personal discussion with representatives of His Majesty's other Governments. The interests of the Colonies will of course be borne in mind by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom.

SALARIES AND WAGES.

Mr. CRAVEN-ELLIS: 39.
asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a public appeal to firms and companies who followed the lead of the Government when they reduced the pay of civil servants, the police, and the fighting services, etc., to again follow the lead of the Government and restore the cuts which they made in the wages of their employés, and so help to improve the purchasing power of the people?

Mr. BALDWIN: The reductions which have been made in salaries and wages in
industry in 1931 and subsequently were necessitated by the differing requirements of individual industries. I have no doubt that those responsible for the regulation of salaries and wages in each industry are fully aware of the restoration which the Government has made in respect of the reductions in the remuneration of State servants and other classes and of the circumstances in which that restoration has been rendered possible. Whether similar circumstances apply in any particular industry is a matter for those responsible for that industry to consider and, as circumstances vary very widely between one industry and another, I do not think a public appeal by the 'Government would be appropriate.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I should like to ask the Lord President of the Council whether, as there are so many firms now doing Government work, it is not in the interest of all concerned that the Government should use its influence with these firms to see that the cuts are restored; that they should follow the economy policy of the Government and give back what was taken off?

Mr. BALDWIN: I do not think that I can add anything to the reply.

Mr. LOUIS SMITH: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in many parts of the country a considerable number of firms have already restored the cuts?

Oral Answers to Questions — PALESTINE.

IMMIGRATION.

Mr. JANNER (for Captain STRICKLAND): 7.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the 500 skilled workers to be admitted into Palestine in the near future for certain specified trades or crafts will be in excess of the quota of certificates previously decided upon for the half year?

The SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister): The 500 skilled persons concerned do not come within the category of labour immigrants and do not therefore affect the half-yearly quota of labour immigration certificates.

UNEMPLOYMENT STATISTICS.

Mr. JANNER(for Captain STRICKLAND): 8.
asked the Secretary of
State for the Colonies whether he is satisfied with the procedure adopted in collecting unemployment statistics among the Arabs in Palestine, in view of the statements in the report of the Department of Agriculture for June, 1934, on crop prospects that there is a shortage of labour, especially in the villages of the central plain and foothills, and that in the typically Arab Gaza-Majdal district there is a shortage of labour in this district notwithstanding the influx of Bedouin from Sinai?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I have not received the report to which my hon. Friend refers, but I should not regard a shortage of Arab labour in a particular village or district as being in itself an indication of unreliability in the unemployment statistics for Palestine as a whole, which showed at the end of April 14,000 Arabs unemployed. Various measures have been taken in recent years to improve the system of collecting these statistics, and provision has now been made for the establishment of a central statistical bureau, by means of which it is hoped, in course of time, to obtain statistics of greater accuracy with regard to unemployment and many other matters.

Mr. JANNER: Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to ascertain whether the report which has been issued is correct? As I understand, it refers to employment over a very wide area.

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: The hon. Member knows that the High Commissioner has constantly under review the conditions of labour in Palestine, and I do not think it is in the least necessary to make a special inquiry. Some months ago I made some inquiries about an allegation that foreign labour was being employed, and the High Commissioner made exhaustive inquiries and reported that the allegation was wholly unfounded.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Mr. ATTLEE: Can the Lord President of the Council. now tell the House what business will be taken before the Summer Recess?

Mr. BALDWIN: The measures with which the Government propose to pro-
ceed and pass before the Summer Recess are as follow:
All stages of the Cattle Industry (Emergency Provisions) Bill and of the County Courts Bill, which is mainly consolidation of the law, and is yet to come from another place.
Committee and remaining stages of the Whaling Industry (Regulation) Bill [Lords], and of the necessary financial resolutions.
Report and Third Reading of the Administration of Justice (Appeals) Bill [Lords]; Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill [Lords]; and Solicitors Bill [Lords].
Two and a-half allotted Supply days remain to be disposed of after to-day. Certain Civil Supplementary Estimates have been presented, and the usual Resolutions will be required relating to surpluses and deficits on Navy, Army and Air Estimates for 1932 and, on the conclusion of the Business of Supply, the Appropriation Bill must be passed through all its stages.
It may be necessary to consider Lords Amendments to Bills which have already passed this House, and Motions to approve Orders made under the Imports Duties Act, 1932. Any other Business will be brought forward which it is found necessary to pass before the Summer Recess.
I hope that arrangements can be made to dispose of outstanding Business in time to allow the Motion for the Summer Adjournment to be taken on Tuesday, 31st July. I am not yet in a position to state the date of reassembly in the Autumn.
The following Bills will be postponed and dealt with in the Autumn:
All stages of the Electricity Supply Bill [Lords]; Merchandise Marks (Trade Descriptions) Bill; Sea Fisheries (Regulation) Bill [Lords]; and Dindings Agreement (Approval) Bill [Lords] now in another place.
Report and Third Reading of the Betting and Lotteries Bill [Lords], and of the Diseases of Fish Bill [Lords], now before Standing Committees. A Money Resolution in respect of the Diseases of Fish Bill is also outstanding.
The House will notice that no provision has been made for the concluding stages of the Incitement to Disaffection Bill. The Government have decided, in view of the heavy legislative programme which has been completed this Session, not to ask the House to take the remaining stages of the Bill before the Summer Recess. The Incitement to Disaffection Bill will, however, be one of the first Measures to be dealt with when the House resumes in the Autumn.

Mr. D. G. SOMERVILLE: Will any statement be made in connection with the Air Force before the House rises?

Mr. BALDWIN: I have promised that repeatedly.

DURHAM COUNTY WATER BOARD BILL [Lords].

Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

CONSOLIDATION BILLS.

Report from the Joint Committee, in respect of the County Courts Bill [Lords] (pending in the Lords), with Minutes of Evidence, and Special Report brought up, and read;

Report and Special Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

That they have agreed to—

Glasgow Corporation Order Confirmation Bill.

London Midland and Scottish Railway Order Confirmation Bill, without Amendment.

Amendment to—

Ministry of Health Provisional Order Confirmation (South Middlesex and Richmond Joint Hospital District) Bill [Lords], without Amendment.

Amendments to—

Ministry of Health Provision Order Confirmation (Herriard and District Water) Bill [Lords].

Torquay Corporation Bill [Lords].

Sunderland and South Shields Water Bill [Lords], without Amendment.

Orders of the Day — SUPPLY.

[18TH ALLOTTED DAY.]

Considered in Committee.

[Captain BOURNE in the Chair.]

CIVIL ESTIMATES AND SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE, 1934.

CLASS V.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FOR SCOTLAND.

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £1,919,120 (including a Supplementary sum of £36,700) be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1935, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of Health for Scotland; including Grants and other Expenses in connection with Housing, certain Grants to Local Authorities, &c., Grant in Aid of the Highlands and Islands Medical Service, Grants in Aid of Benefits and Expenses of Administration under the National Health Insurance Acts; certain Expenses in connection with the Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Contributory Pensions Acts, and other Services." [Note.—£1,100,000 has been voted on account.]

3.22 p.m.

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Mr. Skelton): From the mere recital of the Estimate the Committee will see the large number of topics to which I might direct attention, but I think I shall be reflecting the wishes of the Committee if I address myself mainly to the question of housing. I am satisfied that if I can initiate a discussion of value on the topic of housing in Scotland I shall be dealing with a topic which the Committee deems to be the most important.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Before the Under-Secretary initiates any further, I would ask him what he means by simply dealing with housing. Were we not to embrace health with housing?

Mr. SKELTON: Even on my first sentence the hon. Member asks me a question. The main topic which I propose to deal with to-day is housing, but if any hon. Member desires to raise other questions I shall, of course, do my best to deal with them in reply, but I am satisfied that in the whole area of
activity of the Department the question of housing is the most vital before it. There are, however, one or two other matters about which I desire to say a few words before I turn to housing. First let me say that the total amount of the Estimate shows an increase of £150,000. That £150,000 represents an increased expenditure upon housing. The estimated expenditure has increased by £156,000, but certain reductions have reduced the increase to £150,000.
The two topics I want to say a few words about before I turn to housing, are, first of all, questions connected with public health, and some connected with water supply. On both these topics I shall be very brief. The record of public health as tested, first by infant mortality, and secondly by maternal mortality, shows for 1933 a small but definite improvement. I do not say that we can draw any general deduction from an improvement extending over 12 months only, but I think the Committee will be glad to know, with regard to infant mortality, that the figure has fallen from 86 per 1,000 in 1932 to 81 per 1,000 in 1933—a very definite fall. With regard to maternal mortality,.Which I dealt with at some length last year on this day, I can also report a small reduction. In 1932 the mortality was 6.3 per 1,000, and this year it has fallen to 5.9 per 1,000. It is in fact as low a figure as we have had since 1924. Least of all on that topic do I seek to draw any general deduction.
The Department has a very elaborate and scientific investigation in progress on. maternal mortality, and it is much more important that the cases should be most closely examined and sound deductions drawn than that we should seek to hasten the production of the report. I am sure the whole Committee look forward to reading with great interest the results of the scrutiny, which is more detailed and more widely extended than any other scrutiny on this important topic conducted elsewhere.
Let me turn to the subject of water, which South of the Tweed is a very urgent matter. Fortunately we are most definitely better off in Scotland. Last December we were in considerable anxiety, but the resources of the Scottish climate came to our aid, and the months particularly of January, April and May did more than their average work with
regard to rainfall. April produced a. rainfall which was 82 per cent, above the average of the last 35 years. May gave 20 per cent, and January 17 per cent. That has very much improved the situation. There are a few places where it is necessary to cut off the water within certain hours, and there are other districts and places where it has been necessary to issue warning notices; but, speaking generally, while we are watching the situation with very great care, it may be said that the existing provisions for water supply are functioning according to their ability. I use that phrase because it brings me to the other topic I want to deal with—the existing provisions. The next thing is to improve the existing provisions.
As the Committee know, an Act was passed this year which gave, for the assistance of rural water supply in England, £1,000,000, and in Scotland the sum of £137,000. Following that Act, the Department asked for applications for schemes to be put before it by 15th June. These applications are now in. They are 176 in number and they cover schemes representing a total expenditure of £1,095,000. Our grant of £137,000, if distributed by way of a flat rate system, would amount to some 12 per cent. of that total; but the Committee know that we do not think that in this matter a mere flat rate assistance is the proper way to proceed. Therefore we propose to allocate that grant in order of need. I mention that only to show that the considerations which will be before us in determining which application shall receive a grant and what amount it shall be, are (1) the requirements of public health; (2) the requirements of housing; and (3) the financial needs of the area from which the application comes. That is all I can say on that topic for the moment.
I now turn to the question of housing in Scotland, and I am glad to say that I am able to submit an account of work achieved which I think the Committee will regard as satisfactory. Before I deal with the general work of the construction of new houses and the operation of the 1933 Act and all those interesting topics, let me clear out of the way the question of the extent to which the reconditioning of rural cottages in Scotland has proceeded during the last year. The number of rural cottages reconditioned under the Acts of 1926 and 1931,
during the year 1933, was 2,815, which, if not the highest figure ever reached in any one year, is a very high figure. That brings the total number of cottages reconditioned to 14,012. That the work is still going on is shown by the fact that applications for grants for reconditioning during 1933 were also up to a good standard. They numbered 2,800 as against 2,600 in the previous year. Without developing the subject further, I think I may say that these Acts, for which Members on both sides of the Committee are responsible—the Conservative party having passed the original Act and the Labour party the amending Act—are, so far as Scotland is concerned, functioning constantly and effectively for the reconditioning of houses mainly in the rural areas.
I now come to the main question of the work which has been achieved in the rehousing of the people since last the Department's Estimates were considered in Committee of Supply. Let me say at once that, as regards the number of houses completed with State assistance, 1933 was a record year. The number of houses completed under all the Acts was 20,915, the previous highest figure having been in 1927 when the number completed was 20,158. The past year's achievement thus wins by almost 800 houses over the previous best. But that is not everything. The figure which I have just given is the figure up to 31st December, 1933, but for the first six months of 1934 we have again a record. The number of houses completed with State assistance during those six months was 11,850. The previous highest figure for a six months period was in the year before and the figure in that case was 9,051. The Committee may ask whether the total for the present year will reach or surpass the record of last year. I cannot make an estimate but I can say that with 2,600 houses in hand at the end of the first six months, it looks as if the figures for 1934 would certainly bear comparison with those for 1933. For the rest we had better await the event.

Mr. KENNETH LINDSAY: Can the hon. Gentleman say under which Act these 11,850 houses were
built?

Mr. SKELTON: Under all the Acts. The year 1933 with which we are mainly dealing is interesting in this respect as being the year in which the Housing Act
passed by this Parliament began to function. The Committee will I am sure desire me to give a full account of the functioning of the Act. I shall endeavour to give not only a full but I hope a clear and impartial account of what has been done under that Measure. I would first recall to the Committee that the objective of the 1933 Act was to concentrate State assistance and local activity upon slum clearance. We brought to an end the £9 subsidy under the 1924 Act and we attempted to concentrate the attention of local authorities on the major problem of slum clearance and I submit that it is by its effect upon slum clearance that the 1933 Act must be judged. That is the test. Slum clearance began as a result of the 1923 Act and was carried on by the 1930 Act. The 1923 Act began to operate in 1924 and in the nine years from 1924 to 1932, the total number of slum clearance houses completed was 19,699. That figure represented the work of nine years. In the 18 months including 1933 and the first half of 1934 the total number of slum clearance houses completed has been 11,647. That is 11,647 for 18 months as against 19,700 for nine years—a very striking advance to which I particularly direct the attention of the Committee.
We were not content with attempting to concentrate the attention of local authorities upon slum clearance merely by legislating. We have attempted, not without success, to institute a real drive in administration and in every other way possible towards the development of slum clearance programmes and the acceleration of the work. It will be recalled that on 31st December, 1933, the time had come for local authorities to send in returns of their requirements and their estimated programmes for the ensuing five year period. The estimated number of uninhabitable houses in Scotland was set down at 61,200 and the local authorities programmes—for the most part fixed but in some proportion still rovisional—propose for the period to secure the building of 56,394 houses, that is to say just over 92 per cent. of the total number of houses recognised as uninhabitable houses in Scotland at present. It may be asked why have only a 92 per cent. programme? Why the margin of 8 percent.? Some small proportion of these 61,000 houses may be capable of
being reconditioned. I do not think it will exceed the 8 per cent., but my impression is that the programmes promised by the local authorities, fixedly or provisionally, will amount to very nearly 100 per cent. of the requirements, so far as slum clearance is concerned.
The real drive in housing does not consist merely in stimulating local authorities to put forward good programmes. It consists also in giving them every assistance to carry out these programmes that the central Department can give, and it is for that reason that I draw particular attention to new administrative assistance which, within the last few months, we are giving to the local authorities. We have named it the "Flying Squad," but it consists of experts who go round to the local authorities giving them every kind of assistance, which, without going into too great detail falls into two classes; first, assistance in pointing out to them the full resources of the existing legislation; and, secondly and more important, the best technical assistance on structural and other practical questions. That new branch of the Department came into existence last May. Already it has assisted 125 housing authorities out of a total of 228 in Scotland, and, without going into details, I can assure the Committee that the work it is doing is extremely valuable and that it is well worth its institution.
The institution of this most valuable administrative assistance was, if I may say so in his presence, directly the result of the work of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, and it is only another example of his insight and foresight in every practical administrative problem, with regard to which, as we say in Scotland, a poor lawyer buddy can only stand and admire. It is the essence of the idea that we should have this constant touch on their own ground with the local authorities, and I hope the local authorities will agree that the work already done in helping them is of real value. First of all, it has already helped to increase the programmes that the local authorities have put forward, but also it is helping to accelerate their completion.
Let me deal now with the further progress of slum clearance as a result of this drive: I gave the Committee the figures of the completions in the last 18 months, as against those for the previous nine
years, but that is not the end of it. The best test of the way in which the momentum in slum clearance is gathering is the number of tenders which have been approved for the construction of new houses, and I will give one or two figures which I think are very illuminating. The tenders which were approved in the year 1931 numbered 5,500; in the year 1932 they numbered 8,191; in 1933 that figure had increased to 8,643; but, if we are to test how things are getting on up to the actual moment, we must see bow the tenders for the first six months of this year compare. The tenders for the first six months of 1933 were 4,807, and for the first six months of this year they were 6,738; that is to say, an increase of Almost 2,000. It does not end there. Taking it up almost to to-day, the tenders approved for the first fortnight of July of this year numbered 822, whereas the tenders approved for the whole month of July last year numbered only 880, and it looks as if in July we shall get 100 per cent increase. I think I am not overstating it when I say that there is a constantly increasing momentum and intensity in the work of getting on with the new slum clearance houses, and I am satisfied that, returning again to the functioning of the 1933 Act, we could not have got that result, and the even better results that we hope to get in the months ahead of us, unless we had concentrated the attention of the local authorities in the first place on the slum clearance problem.
The Committee will expect me to say one word on the other provisions of the 1933 Act. It was intended that private enterprise should do the main work of building houses to let for the working classes, and that for that purpose they should receive the assistance of building society loans for a particularly high percentage guaranteed by the State. Let me be perfectly frank. Under that particular provision very little has been done, and only one scheme, of 260 houses, has been approved. That was in Edinburgh; but that does not end the activities of private enterprise. I think the most remarkable new phenomenon in housing in Scotland is the greatly increased activity of private enterprise in building houses of five apartments or under, mainly, of course, to sell. I am not saying that these houses are necessarily working-class houses—I do not make that point—but I do say that the addition of the
figures which I am going to give to the total supply of new houses in Scotland must have a very considerable effect. I am not going to dogmatise, but I will say that we are watching what the effect will be with the very greatest possible interest.
I think it was the year 1927 when the Department first got information as to the number of houses completed by private enterprise. That was, at all events, the first year of accurate statistics. In that year private enterprise completed houses of five apartments and under—I disregard the others—to the number of 1,502; in 1928 it rose to 1,703; and after that, between 1928 and 1932, the figures were lower. In 1932 the number of this class of house completed by unassisted private enterprise was actually 1,456. Now what happened in 1933? That figure of 1,456 rose at a bound to 5,202—very remarkable—and, as far as we can see, that new level of private enterprise construction of houses of five apartments and under is being to a very considerable extent maintained, because in the first six months of this year 1,724 have been completed, which is a higher number for six months than for any whole year before 1933. I said that I was not going to dogmatise, and I have not the material for doing so, but it is a fact that some of these houses approach the capacity of the better paid wage-earning class.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Do they rank for subsidy?

Mr. SKELTON: No. They are unassisted private enterprise houses. The supply of these houses for the better paid wage-earners will, I believe, have very important results. It is a striking thing that this new level of private enterprise building has been reached and that it has occurred after the introduction of the 1933 Act.

Mr. NEIL MACLEAN: Is the Under-Secretary trying to draw a moral from the jump in the figures in the last 18 months? Can he make any statement of the rent that is being charged or are the houses only for sale?

Mr. SKELTON: They are to an enormous extent for sale only. There are a few examples for letting—only 28, I think, for the first quarter of this year. I have scrutinised the rents that are
payable for this small proportion, and I find that some of them are approaching working-class levels. I will not say more than that.

Sir ROBERT SMITH: Would it be possible to give the average price of these houses?

Mr. SKELTON: It would not be possible now because I have not the figures, but, if any one wishes to pursue this question in subsequent speeches, I will give any details that I can in my reply. I do not want to draw any definite moral. I merely say it is an interesting phenomenon which, I think, will have some relation to the general question of housing.

Mr. DAVID MASON: Does the Under-Secretary attribute the large increase to the lower cost of materials?

Mr. SKELTON: I am not going to draw any general deduction. There is a variety of causes, but there is nothing worse than trying to give premature explanations of a phenomenon. Even a scientist would not do that. Let me turn to another feature of the 1933 Act, the £3 subsidy which was for houses to rent to low-paid wage earners living in overcrowded conditions. Here, again, I frankly admit that the results in figures have been disappointing. We have now 1,253 of these houses completed, under construction, or approved. We know that every one of these houses will pull their weight, that the right people will go into them, and that State money is being applied to what we want to apply it to, namely, the assistance of low-paid wage earners whose economic situation compels them to live in overcrowded conditions. We have undertakings from the local authorities that they will select only the low-paid wage earners and people living in overcrowded conditions for these houses, and we shall see when the time comes for paying the subsidies that these undertakings are carried out.

Mr. DUNCAN GRAHAM: Will the unemployed be excluded?

Mr. SKELTON: I do not think so. This is the nearest approach that has been made directly to cater for the re-housing of people who are unemployed. We have never before by legislation fixed a rent at all or fixed a rent at such a low figure. These are the comments I
wish to make on the 1933 Act, and that is the situation as I think it can be impartially put before the Committee—this great extension of activity against slum clearance, this extraordinary phenomenon of the increase of unassisted private enterprise building, and the building of the smaller class of house for workers from overcrowded districts under the £3 subsidy. Let me complete this by saying that we have had almost universal expressions of opinion from local authorities that in their experience the £3 subsidy was not high enough.
I cannot go into the question of future legislation, but I can say that the next stage of our programme is to deal drastically, thoroughly, completely, and we hope finally, with the questions of over-crowding. I cannot deal with the actual provisions because they will have to be in legislative form, but I would say in regard to the £3 subsidy that it has blazed a fresh trail in housing. It has laid down by Statute a maximum limit of rent, and it has laid down that State assistance Should be given to people of low wage-earning capacity and that the people who most need re-housing are those living in over-crowded conditions. Those provisions which surround the £3 subsidy will dominate the considerations of future State assistance to cure over-crowding, and ensure that the assistance of the State will be most wisely applied to the low-paid wage earner. My right hon. Friend and the Department of Health and all connected with Scottish administration, either local or central, are convinced that the problem of over-crowding is peculiarly Scottish, peculiarly dangerous, and one which, as a famous figure said at this Box, brooks no delay.
In Scotland almost 15 per cent. of our people are living three to a room. The English figure, which I think is worked out on equivalent data, is only some 15 per cent. Therefore, we have here a special Scottish problem. My right hon. Friend and I have said again and again that we are determined next Session to grapple with this problem. I cannot deal with the method which we shall adopt, but I can say that the £3 subsidy of the 1933 Act, which local authorities have pointed out is not in itself sufficient, has blazed the trail along which we must go, and that we must concentrate upon the low wage earner and on seeing that the rent he pays for the house that is built
is one which he can afford. We must concentrate on the over-crowded areas in Scotland and clean them out and spread out the people who are living in them. That is the fundamental problem of the social life of Scotland. It is for the purpose of putting the position clearly that I have attempted to deal mainly with housing, and I hope the Committee will feel that the upshot of it all is that, mainly thanks to my right hon. Friend, we have got such a drive in slum clearance as we have never had before, and that no effort of energy or intelligence will be spared to deal effectively next Session with the problem of over-crowding.

4.0 p.m.

Mr. M. MACLEAN: I think that the Committee will be quite prepared to congratulate the Secretary of State for Scotland and his Under-Secretary on what they consider to be a great impetus in the building of houses in Scotland, and, in their opinion, the building of houses for those who are overcrowded, or are living in overcrowded districts. I think that the Committee will also agree, that while they are to be congratulated on the steps which they have taken, the results are not yet sufficiently complete, or, I should say, sufficiently far advanced to enable us to put forward any really considered opinion as to their value in diminishing the slum conditions of Scotland.
Although the speech of the Under-Secretary was mainly concerned with housing, I do not think that other questions should be excluded. There are certain other matters which, though not definitely in the category of housing, may be considered to be so closely related to it as to enable the Committee, while discussing the problem put forward by the Under-Secretary, to bring them under review. I think that the Department of Health for Scotland must also be congratulated on the fact that in three different categories of disease there has been a very marked diminution in the number of deaths. Considering the large amount of depression there has been in Scotland, the reduced incomes of the household, and, consequently, the reduced vitality of large numbers of those who are living in overcrowded conditions particularly in working-class areas, the fact that from tuberculosis, for instance, there has been such a marked decline in
the death rate is, I think, at least something upon which we can congratulate ourselves. At the same time the increase in deaths from such a complaint as influenza may be considered as due in part to the lowered vitality of the people owing to reduced incomes in households in working-class areas.
The figures which the Under-Secretary has given us with regard to housing are most interesting. They show, as he has said, a very definite and marked increase within recent years. But may I be permitted to point out that the large numbers of houses which have been built by private enterprise must not be considered as in any marked degree—I will not say "in any way "—affecting the housing conditions of those who form the working classes of Scotland. The five-apartment and four-apartment houses which are being built by private enterprise are not the houses which are being occupied by what one would classify as the working classes of Scotland. As a matter of fact, if one goes through what used to be called the middle-class districts of Glasgow—districts such as Pollokshields, Ibrox, Dowanhill and Dennistoun—you find houses with five, four and three apartments, with boards out inviting intending house occupants to view them with a view to becoming tenants. I think that those of us who represent divisions of Glasgow will at once agree with the statement that those who have been previously resident in that type of house are the individuals who want to occupy the five-apartment and four-apartment houses, mainly of the bungalow type, which have been built in the last two or three years by the private builder in Scotland.
Therefore, this type of building is really not affecting in any marked degree the overcrowded conditions of the people of Scotland, because it has not yet got down to the working-class districts, where you will still find, as the hon. Member was good enough to admit, 15 per cent. of our population living three to a room, whereas in England the percentage is very markedly lower, namely, two. I think that in itself indicates, that while we can flatter ourselves upon the re-entry, as one might say, of private enterprise into house building, at the same time we cannot flatter ourselves that private enterprise is entering into it in a manner
which is going to affect the housing of that particular class of person for which the Housing Acts which we have been passing here since 1919 were intended. They are not building houses for the working classes, and, consequently, in any discussion of the housing problem the houses of that type which are being built by the private builder ought not to be taken into consideration. If the private builder alone continued building, and no other houses were built under the £3 subsidy or by local authorities to meet the needs of the working-class population, the conditions in the working-class districts would remain practically the same, and, as the houses became worse, would become even more intensified.
Consequently, I cannot agree with the hon. Member if he considers that these houses built by private enterprise are something upon which we can flatter ourselves as indicating in some way a marked increase in the number of houses which are being built for the convenience of those who most require them in Glasgow. I am certain that those who represent divisions of cities like Glasgow, Dundee and Aberdeen will find that the same problem has arisen in their divisions as we now have in Glasgow. Those who own tenements are complaining bitterly against the local authority being given the subsidy to build working-class houses, when, as a matter of fact, they ought to be complaining against the private builders who are building houses that are attracting tenants from the four-apartment or five-apartment tenement houses to the bungalow type with a garage thrown in.
There are other matters to be discussed in the Debate, and I do not, therefore, want to take up too much time, because a Scottish day is different from an English day on housing, as practically every Scottish Member wants to take part in the Debate, and in the limited time we have to impose upon ourselves the self-denying ordinance which we used to impose upon ourselves in other days, namely, to make our speeches brief, and so enable as many Scottish Members to speak as can be squeezed into the time at our disposal for the two Debates to-day. Therefore, I leave out other matters upon which I might have spoken, and will put one or two pertinent questions to the Under-Secretary.
In a question to-day I brought up once more the matter of the refusal to extend the period during which the old subsidy should be paid to the Glasgow Corporation for a certain number of houses which could not be completed in the stipulated time owing to a trade dispute between the contractors and a section of their employés, namely, the plasterers. On several occasions questions have been put to the right hon. Gentleman, and on each time some reply has been given. I asked last week if it had not been the case that a precedent had already been established for going beyond the period in England. I have here a letter which has been sent on the instructions of a member of the Sheffield Corporation, to the convener of the housing committee of the Glasgow Corporation, which shows the position to be almost identical, as far as I can make out from the letter, with the circumstances which are prevalent in Glasgow with regard to houses which have been left uncompleted. If I may be allowed to do so, I will read the text of the letter:
"Town Hall, Sheffield.
21st June, 1934.
Alderman Gascoigne has asked me to give you some information with reference to a number of houses which the Minister of Health decided should rank for subsidy after the 1924 Act lapsed. The number of houses in question was 472. The Corporation had purchased a large estate to accommodate about 4,500 houses, and when it was decided that no more subsidy should he paid under the 1924 Act, land sufficient to accommodate 358 houses was left over. The street and sewer works had already been completed. and unless the Corporation was able to sell the land or build houses upon it, it would have to be regarded as a heavy loss. After a good deal of pressure by the Estates Committee through the Town Clerk, the Minister eventually decided to allow the subsidy in respect of 472 houses as above stated, leaving 86 to be completed at the Corporation's own expense. It was pointed out by the Minister that a certain sum of money for additional subsidy had been allocated to the whole country,"—
this is the point to which I would draw the attention of the Under-Secretary —
and Sheffield's share would he the amount as represented by the subsidy on the 472 houses. It is the Corporation's intention to build the additional 86 houses to complete the estate. and sanction has already been obtained.
I submit that, in face of a letter containing such information, it is surely justifiable on the part of the housing committee of Glasgow and the Members of
Parliament who represent Glasgow, to press for a clearer explanation as to why, in a dispute such as we have had in Glasgow, where a large number of houses have been left uncompleted, and no fault is attached to, or laid upon the shoulders of, the Glasgow Corporation, they should be made to suffer and lose what I am informed is a capital value of practically £280,000, spread over the years, taking the number of years for which the subsidy for each house would have to be paid. I suggest that this letter shows that a precedent has been established for continuing the subsidy, and I suggest that the case I have raised might be looked into in order to see whether or not these uncompleted houses in Glasgow might not also rank for subsidy—the houses which were affected by the recent plasterers' dispute.

Mr. ALBERT RUSSELL: Does the hon. Member know what additional rate will have to be imposed on the City of Glasgow if it does not get this subsidy?

Mr. MACLEAN: I am informed that the entire loss will amount to £2280,0100 if it does not get this subsidy. I think I gave that figure. Another matter on which I would like the Minister to give us some information arises out of the report of the Public Accounts Committee and concerns the houses at Rosyth and the steel houses which benefited by grants and subsidies from the Government in the past. According to the report of the Public Accounts Committee certain matters come up again, and I would like to know whether there has been any report made upon this class of house, and whether any further statement can be made with regard to any other class of steel houses, in order that we may clear up satisfactorily the position in regard to these houses.

Mr. SKELTON: I will answer that question by letter to-morrow, so that the hon. Member may have the information before the Debate is resumed—that is, with regard to the Rosyth houses.

Mr. MACLEAN: I am much obliged to the hon. Gentleman. I have only to add that I hope that in the new Bill which the Minister has visualised we shall have something which will give a greater incentive to local authorities to go ahead with houses and not leave the position as it seems to have been left since the
slum clearance proposals. I am certain that everyone is satisfied with the way in which the local authorities all over Scotland have worked in with the desires of the Scottish Office, and if the hon. Gentleman could send round a flying squad, send round some members of the Treasury to increase the subsidy and enable the Scottish local authorities to build more houses, both in the towns and in the rural areas, I feel sure that within the lifetime of everyone here the slum problem as we know it, and the housing problem as we have known it for so many years. would entirely disappear.

4.20 p.m.

Major Sir ARCHIBALD SINCLAIR: I am sure we all hope that the Under-Secretary will take heed of the hint thrown out by the hon. Member for Govan (Mr. N. Maclean). In the War there was a famous and gallant officer who rode round among the Arab tribes with his saddle-bags filled with gold and induced them to rise and fight on our side, and I am sure that if the Under-Secretary of State rode round with promises of large subsidies to the local authorities we should get the housing problem quickly solved. But I am afraid he would find it a difficult task to get a commission from the higher authorities, and, therefore, we must discuss the housing problem within the limits of the situation, financial and legislative, as we have it. I agree with the two hon. Members who have preceded me that the housing problem is not only a vital question, but that it is, of all the questions dealt with in the Annual Report for 1933 of the Department of Health, the most urgent at the present time, and before they spoke I had intended to concentrate my remarks on that topic, with, however, this one exception, that wished to refer briefly to the question of water supplies, which is a matter of great urgency in the part of the country which I represent.
Not only was there a drought last year but, after a wet spring, we now have another dry summer, and the situation is really serious in the Highlands of Scotland. We have had a Bill to deal with rural water supplies, but I hope the Secretary of State, when considering the claims of the large number of hungry, or, rather, I should say, thirsty clients for the aid which he is able to dispense,
will remember that in these Highland counties there are people who are actually drinking water from peat bogs and carting it long distances, and their case ought to have special attention. I am speaking not only for my own counties; all Highland Members will agree that the claims of these scattered communities, living in homes of low rateable value, ought to have both urgent and sympathetic consideration.
I will pass now to the question with which I intend to deal this afternoon, the housing question. I remarked when I rose that it was a particularly urgent problem, and it is urgent for a great many reasons, some of which were dealt with by the two hon. Gentlemen who have preceded me, but a new factor has emerged since we discussed the subject last year. The problem is now seen to be one of even greater magnitude than we believed when considering the report of the Department for 1932. In that report there was a careful analysis of the problem as it then appeared, and it was estimated that 6,100 houses were required annually to replace houses which were gradually becoming unfit and to meet the normal growth of population. That would be 30,500 houses in five years. In addition, it was estimated that there was an actual shortage of 53,000 houses. Adding those two figures together, that meant that over a period of five years, we should require 83,500 houses. That was the size of the problem last year. Since then the local authorities have, with five exceptions—five out of 228—submitted plans of their housing requirements for the years 1934-38, and the total number of houses required is no less than 127,540, which is 50 per cent. more than the figure we discussed last year.
What progress are we making in dealing with this problem? A housing Measure was passed last year which was to deal with the problem both of slum clearance and overcrowding in Scotland, and I wish to know whether it has really increased the number of houses built and the rate at which they are being built. The Department of Health say in their report this year, and it was repeated by the Under-Secretary, that housing continued at an accelerated rate in 1933 and that the output of houses was a record for any year since the national housing effort began in 1919. That re-
port is dated December, 1933, though it only reaches our hands in the middle of 1934. I venture to say, and I am glad the Under-Secretary has come back to hear me say it, that that statement which, as I say, he repeated at the Box this afternoon, does not give a true reflection of the trend of house building in Scotland at the present time. In making that assertion, I base myself on answers given to Parliamentary questions, and I would say how grateful I am to the Under-Secretary and to the officials of the Department for the extraordinary courtesy with which they have provided me with a vast number of detailed figures.
The statement which the Under-Secretary made this afternoon is true, but the statement I am going to make now is also true. While as a result of the concerted action of the local authorities and the Department the number of houses under construction increased all through 1932, and reached the peak figure in April, 1933, when 24,269 houses were under construction, the total number has since then steadily declined. I am not now dealing with slum clearance. The Under-Secretary referred to the flying squadron, and I would pay a tribute to the work of that flying squadron of experts sent out to advise local authorities. I agree that it was a good idea, and the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary deserve our congratulations. But when the Under-Secretary tells us that it is helping to enlarge and to accelerate programmes I can only say that his statement is not reflected in the returns as they are furnished to us in this House. Let me take the number of assisted houses under construction at the end of each month. The peak month was April, 1933; that was the end of the great effort which started in January, 1932, and the figure reached in April, 1933, was 24,269. Since then there has been a steady decline, and at the end of June of this year the figure was 13,515. That is a decline of over 10,000 houses, or of more than 45 per cent. in the number of assisted houses.

Mr. SKELTON: In quoting those figures, as the right hon. Gentleman is perfectly justified in doing, he should recollect that the slum clearance programme only began to materialise in January, and that it is only now that its
effects are being reproduced. I believe that we shall very soon approach another peak.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: I am obliged to the Under-Secretary. The very last thing I would do is to misrepresent him or be unfair to him in argument, and I hope, if he thinks I am, that he will intervene again and stop me. I am coming to the slum clearance figures in a moment, and I agree with the Under-Secretary that there is a more healthy turn to the slum clearance figures in more recent months, but I am now dealing with the actual output of houses since April, 1933, and I say that at a time when the reports of the local authorities show that the need for houses is 50 per cent. greater than it was last year, the output of houses is 45 per cent. smaller.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Is that when the right hon. Gentleman was the Secretary of State?

Sir A. SINCLAIR: I hope the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) will not try to make this into a personal controversy. If he wants to challenge my administration, I shall be delighted to defend it, but I cannot believe that that would be interesting to the Committee, at this stage. I particularly want to avoid going into that, and of taking a personal view. I am sorry if the hon. Member wishes to force me into taking a personal view of this problem.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Be sure your sins will find you out, that's all.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: I was dealing with the number of houses constructed last month, and comparing that with the situation in April last year.

Mr. K. LINDSAY: Am Ito understand that the right hon. Gentleman is saying that there is a diminution under the Act of 1924?

Sir A. SINCLAIR: I am giving the total number of houses constructed in Scotland under all Acts, and I am saying that when the need for houses is 50 per cent. more, the total number of houses being constructed in Scotland under all Housing Acts is 45 per cent. less. My statement is as true as that of the Department, but it is more significant, because it shows for the whole range of
housebuilding what is the trend of the Government's policy under the 1933 Act.
Let me break up the problem and turn to one or two of the particular aspects of it, and first to rural houses. As regards reconditioning of those houses, the policy of the right hon. Gentleman is doing well. The number of houses which are being reconditioned is being kept up, and I would like to pay a tribute to the right hon. Gentleman in regard to that. As regards the replacement of uninhabitable houses, the rate of progress is too slow and too patchy, and. the speed at which the work is going on is tending to slacken. It improved about a year ago, and 1933 was a good year, but unfortunately the latest figures, which I received in answer to a Parliamentary question, show that it is falling off.
When the 1933 Act was passing through this House we were very much concerned about rural houses, and we asked particularly that the Government should ensure that effective measures would be taken to deal with the large number of uninhabitable houses in rural areas. The Under-Secretary of State himself described the replacement of uninhabitable houses as the major problem in the rural districts of Scotland, and he gave it as his impression that the county authorities were making adequate use of the Act. The total which I have here shows that out of 33 county authorities, 16 have made no use of the Act in the past year, and of those 16, the majority are Highland and thoroughly rural counties. I am now dealing with the 1930 Act. The counties which are not making progress are those in which the need for the replacement of uninhabitable houses is greatest. I might add that another five counties have only had one scheme each in the last year, and in some cases that scheme covers only four houses—in more than one case, at any rate. It is not surprising, therefore, that the number of houses constructed to replace uninhabitable houses in county areas has declined from 647 to 518, a decline of 130 houses as compared with last year, for the last quarter for which figures are available, that is, March, April and May. I therefore urge that greater use should be made of the powers available to deal with this problem.
I come to the question of the cost of houses. Speaking on 10th April last year, the Under-Secretary told us that the
three-apartment houses in Glasgow were costing £231 and that in Edinburgh the figure was more striking, £243, for a three-apartment house. He told us that there was a progressive decline in house construction, and he asserted that he was satisfied that the fall in housing costs was by no means at an end. We took the opposite view and said that the more successful the Act was the more certain it was to raise housing costs. We are not surprised that the cost is now up in Glasgow to £248 and in Edinburgh to £262. I cannot help thinking that if housing is accelerated, as we hope it is to be, we face the certainty that housing costs will rise. That is one of the reasons why we said that the £3 subsidy would prove to be wholly inadequate to provide the houses required. I have no doubt that this upward trend is one reason why local authorities are so reluctant to use the £3 subsidy. There were two main clauses in the Housing (Financial Provisions) (Scotland) Act, in one of which a guarantee was given to enable building corporations to build houses by private enterprise, and under the other, the £3 subsidy was given to local authorities. I would ask the Secretary of State what is the position with regard to the guarantee. The Under-Secretary of State said to-day, and I was informed in answer to a question on 26th June:
One scheme, comprising 260 houses, has been approved for guarantee purposes under Section 3 of the Act of 1933. Of these houses, which were approved in April last, 20 have been completed, approximately 180 are under construction, and the remainder have not been begun."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th June, 1934; col. 973, Vol. 291.]
To-day am informed that the number of houses completed with the help of the guarantee was 20 and the number then approved—that was on 30th June of last year—for guarantee purposes, but not begun, was nil. What has happened to the remaining 240 houses? Is there some reason why they are not being proceeded with?
The private enterprise Clause of the 1933 Act has been of no effect. The Under-Secretary of State tells us that without any guarantee or any assistance of any sort or kind, the very large and notable number of private enterprise houses built has been 5,200. I agree that that is a very good thing. It must be a good thing to have houses being built all
over the country, because the filtering up process must be going on to some extent. Some of us may have put too much weight upon the filtering up process in the past, but that process must be operating to some extent. Other houses must be being cleared for people who cannot afford to have those houses, and that will take some people off the housing market and allow others to filter in to the better houses. Not that this development is remarkable as the Under-Secretary of State tried to persuade us this afternoon. I remember that this time last year, when we were discusisng this very Estimate, the Under-Secretary of State told us that 14 corporations had been formed and that an output of 4,000 houses was expected from them. As there had been 1,456 houses the previous year, it was not unnatural that we should expect something in the order of 5,600 this year. This is no criticism of the hon. Gentleman. I think last year he rightly appreciated the prospect. The guarantee part of the 1933 Act has not been used. The houses are being built by private enterprise as a result of the fall of prices.
I come to the other Clause in regard to the £3 subsidy. The Under-Secretary says that that Clause blazed a trail; am not quite sure what trail it blazed, but in so far as the idea was to concentrate the subsidy assistance upon the lower-paid wage earner—that was the idea which, as he well knows, was in our minds for some time before the introduction of the 1933 Act—it was a sound and a good idea and it received a notable promotion in that Act from the acceptance by the Government of an Amendment put down by the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) to restrict the subsidy to houses the rent of which did not exceed 6s. per week. The Government went much farther than that last year. They told us that this subsidy was ample to enable houses to be built to meet the needs of the lower-paid wage earners. I am afraid that that has not proved to be the case. I need not quote the Report of the Department of Health, because the Under-Secretary himself has said that the local authorities are now demanding that greater help should be given to them in their attempt to solve their statutory problem of making provision for the housing of the working classes. This part of the Act has been described by Sir William Whyte as a dead letter, and I
am afraid that that is not an exaggerated description. The Under-Secretary has said that 1,253 houses have been built or are under construction under this Act, but of course that is only as many as were sometimes completed in a month under the regime before the Act of 1933 came into operation. Those 1,253 houses are the total since the Act came into force. Indeed, in 1933 the total decline in the number of tenders approved each month was nearly 30 per cent., or at any rate more than 25 per cent., as compared with 1932.
I come now to the question of slum clearance. We asserted last year that the idea that you can switch off ordinary housing, and concentrate all your resources on slum clearance, was unsound, and I am very glad to find that the Government are coming to that view and are going to deal with overcrowding under new proposals, because I think it is generally admitted that it is no use concentrating on slum clearance if, while you are dealing with slum clearance you leave new slums constantly being created in your rear by overcrowding. I agree with the statement in the Report of the Department of Health that great advantages are obtained where slum clearance and overcrowding are dealt with by a co-ordinated effort, and it was the necessity for that co-ordinated effort that we on these benches urged when the Bill of 1933 was under discussion in the House last year.
I have quoted figures dealing with the falling off in the amount of ordinary housing done in Scotland, and I come now to the figures of slum clearance. It is true that the total number of slum clearance houses under construction in June, 1934, showed an increase, as compared with June, 1933, of exactly 900. That is an increase of about one-ninth, but it is by no means the greatest increase that has been shown, for a comparison as between June, 1932, when the number under construction was 5,867, and June, 1933, when the number was 8,899, shows an increase, not of one-ninth, but of 50 per cent. I agree, however, with the statement of the Under-Secretary, that there are signs that the curve, having sagged, is now beginning to rise, and I hope that that tendency will,continue. I am sure that, if there is anything that any hon. Member in any quarter of the House can do to help in that direction,
it will be very gladly done. At the same time, however, we not only want to see a concentration on slum clearance, but are eagerly awaiting the proposals which are to be forthcoming in the autumn, and which we said last year ought to have been forthcoming then, under the Measure of 1933, to deal with the problem of overcrowding.
I would only say in conclusion that the magnitude of the problem is, as I have said, greater than any of us realised last year, and greater than the Department of Health itself realised; that the urgency is very great from the standpoint both of the health and of the social contentment of the people; that there is here a great opportunity for a real stimulus to industrial revival in Scotland; and that this is the right way to do it, by increasing the purchasing power of the people, by giving them work to do—work of real national importance, for it is going to help, not merely the building and all the allied industries, but every trade in the country, including agriculture, if purchasing power is increased in that way. I hope that the Government will go forward whole-heartedly with the solution of this problem, and assure them that we shall await with keen expectation the proposals which the Under-Secretary tells us will be introduced in the autumn.

4.51 p.m.

Sir SAMUEL CHAPMAN: I desire to go a little further than my right hon. Friend the Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir A. Sinclair), and really, not half-heartedly, congratulate my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and his most able Under-Secretary on the report which they are able to present to the House this afternoon. The Secretary of State, if I may presume to say so, is going about things in the right way. He has here an able Under-Secretary, who has been taking his place, and he is getting about and seeing for himself what is going on and what; is wanted. I know enough of the political history of Greenock to know that there was a former Member for Greenock whom his friends designated as the Member for Scotland. That may be news to some of my friends here. His name was Mr. Dunlop. I have thought many times, as I have seen my right hon. Friend's activities reported in the Press, that it can now again be said that we have a Member for Greenock who is also Member for Scotland.
I must say a ward also about my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary. Nobody in the House has known him for as long a time as I have. I have known him ever since he was a boy at school at Glen-almond, and have watched his rise. He has come on wonderfully well. He has the right spirit. As we are a little family party here this afternoon, I will tell the Committee that my hon. Friend's father was a great friend of a statesman who once said that to improve the social conditions of the people should be the first object of a statesman. I will not say who that was, but anyone who is acquainted with political history will know. I am delighted at the confidence and determination which my hon. Friend has expressed this afternoon that, so far as he can, and so far as the Secretary of State can, they will root out the slums, and thus bring about one of the greatest social reforms for which we have all been longing. My hon. Friend is there to do the job, and he will have the support of Members from all parts of Scotland.
The hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan), who is sitting near me, and who was first elected to the House at the same time as I was, represents a very different constituency from mine. I do not think there are any two Scottish constituencies that are more dissimilar than South Edinburgh and Gorbals. I have said before in the House, and I have told my constituents time after time, that it is the duty of constituencies like my own always to remember that their first duty is to try to ameliorate the condition of those parts of Scotland where the people are less happily housed than we are in South Edinburgh. South Edinburgh is a garden city. Gorbals is anything but a garden city, but South Edinburgh can help Gorbals, and, indeed, the whole of Scotland can help to root out those black spots which we know to exist in various parts of our country.
They have existed even in South Edinburgh itself. Edinburgh is an old city, where the houses in the past were built more like castles, and it takes a long time to root out these old slums. But the Town Council of Edinburgh have been acting with great foresight and doing their part in this greatest of all social reforms—the clearing out of slums and the provision of decent accommodation for those who are living under less
fortunate conditions than their neighbours. The city now covers the largest area of any town in Scotland. I daresay that may be news to my friends from the west. Its area is even larger than that of Glasgow, namely, 32,000 acres. During the last 13 years, the town council have carried out many new housing schemes, including five slum improvement schemes, on land under their jurisdiction. They have expended no less than £6,000,000 in erecting 12,000 new houses for some 48,000 people, and in one year, 1933, they have spent no less than £750,000. Since 1923 they have been engaged in slum clearances, and in Edinburgh alone over 5,000 families have been removed from slums and put into decent houses. The slum improvement schemes are progressing at a rapid rate, and, in addition, it is intended, during each of the next five years, to re-house 1,000 families from insanitary and overcrowded houses. It can safely be said that in a few years Edinburgh, which is famed for its magnificent outward appearance, will also be famed when one goes more minutely into details—that the slums of Edinburgh will be cleared, and the inhabitants of the city will be decently housed, as becomes the majestic and romantic capital that it is.
I remember walking round the slums of London with Lord Shaftesbury more than half-a-century ago, and hearing him speak in the same spirit in which my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary spoke just now, and I am delighted to be here this afternoon to hear my hon. Friend say that the Government are going to put their whole heart into this matter. I, for one, heartily congratulate them on the determination which they have shown. During the last 50 years the face of Scotland has been changed; during the last 10 years the face of Edinburgh has been changed; and we shall go on doing the good work to which we have set our hands, because, as Samuel Johnson said, it is the first test of a civilised nation that there should be decent treatment of the poor. That is a phrase that has worked into all our minds. We are not only social reformers because it is the right thing that we should have social reform and place those in less fortunate circumstances than ourselves in decent conditions; it is the highest statesmanship that we should not have these black spots up and down the land and our people should
be what they have always been, people of good natured character on which the great prosperity and soundness of our country rests.

5.1 p.m.

Mr. BURNETT: It is very gratifying that the Secretary of State is able to present such a record of advance in the matter of slum clearance as we have in this report. At a time when the cost of materials is low and money is cheap it is doubly satisfactory to know that we have had a record year and that the output of houses completed nearly tops 21,000, a figure considerably in excess of the peak year before. It must have meant a great deal of staff work on the part of the Health Department, on which they are to be congratulated. But when we go on to the next paragraph in the Housing Report dealing with the output by private enterprise, there is distinctly room for disappointment. It may be a record, but we should like to see a very much larger record. In England 266,000 houses were built, 208,000 without State assistance. That is nearly 40 times what has been done in Scotland. Of the English houses, 77,000 were C class houses for the lower-paid workers. We in Scotland have not been able to get these houses, which are most required, by private enterprise. I hope before long this will be possible, but certainly so Far it seems to me that the reduction of the subsidies has not met with the corresponding answer from private enterprise that we should like. This is acknowledged to a certain extent in the introductory remarks to the report, which refer to the difficulties in the way of a substantial contribution from private enterprise. I hope the further methods that are visualised in the report will mean that before long we shall have this adequate supply of houses at rents which the lower-paid wage earners can afford.
There is no doubt that in certain of the large cities this overcrowding is the biggest question of all, and I feel some agreement with the statement that I heard a Chief Medical Officer of Health make that he considered that the tackling of overcrowding was the most important thing now, because overcrowding had the most disastrous results on the community in general. To overcrowding can be traced very largely the cases of sexual offences, incest and
offences against morality. Its effect is likely to be serious on the physical and moral well-being of the next generation. It is certainly a very big problem. We have to deal with this drift from the country to the towns that is going on to a very large extent. It is due partly, no doubt, to agriculture depression and partly also to educational facilities in the cities, but one very large cause is the larger relief allowance that is given in the cities than in the surrounding country. We can see this reflected in the school roll during last year. In my constituency we had within a school year an addition to the city school roll of something like 800 children of school age who have been transferred from schools in one of the surrounding counties. That would mean 300 or 400 families who have come into the town leaving out of account families with no children of school age.
Provision for this big influx is certainly a serious matter. We see it also in the waiting list for council houses. At the end of 1932, 1,090 of those on the council list were overcrowding cases. At the end of 1933 there were 1,340 overcrowding cases among those on the roll. These overcrowding cases vary from half an adult overcrowded to six arid a-half adults overcrowded, and there are 625 cases in which there was no proper segregation of sexes. These figures have been checked and are up-to-date, and they reveal the very serious problem that we are up against. It is a very difficult question because 260 on the list have incomes of less than 30s., which means that they have no prospect of paying the rent that is charged for council houses.
I have a long list of overcrowding cases. I will take one—husband and wife and seven sons, aged 26, 23, 19, 17, 15, 11, 10 and two daughters aged 14 and nine, a total of 11 persons, or the equivalent of 10£, adults, in two rooms in which there is accommodation for four adults only. That is a typical case, but I prefer rather to speak of cases with which I personally come into touch. A large number of those who have come to me for help in connection with housing are not so much cases of difficulty in connection with slum conditions as cases of difficulty in connection with overcrowding. I should like to quote one case of a father with four children sleeping in one large bed, mother and infant on the
sofa, and one boy who does night work sleeping during the day. This family was too large to be put into a three-roomed house, but the income was too small for a four-roomed house. They have had to stay in that one-roomed house because they could not get a three-roomed houses. They have been moved recently, one member of the family being boarded out. That is a typical case of difficulty. I should like to mention a rather similar difficulty showing the need for two-roomed houses. I know it is said that two-roomed houses are apt to develop into slums, and the report of the Royal Commission speaks of slum areas being due to the building of two-roomed houses, but there are a certain number who only require two-roomed houses and who cannot afford a big rent.
There is the large question of sub-lets. Many young married people have gone into single sub-let rooms, they have been unable to get any other accommodation, and the family has gradually increased. They may not be sufficiently overcrowded to be given a three-roomed house. For them it would be a great improvement to get a two-roomed house, but the number of two-roomed houses is strictly limited. The Department as a rule does not sanction more than 20 per cent. The housing committee at a recent council meeting recommended 16 per cent., and there was one amendment for 25 per cent. and another for 50 per cent. It was stated that it was more expensive for the council to build two-roomed houses than three-roomed houses, because the State contribution was only £7 I0s. instead of £12 10s., and in each house a scullery, wash-house and bathroom had to be put in, so that the loss of £5 in the subsidy more than counterbalanced the saving on one bedroom. It did not make it an economic proposition to charge less for a two-roomed house than for a three-roomed house. A certain amount of latitude might be allowed. We see the possibility of the two-roomed house coming down to a slum, but we want to help the large number of applicants for whom a two-roomed house would mean improved conditions. The sub-lets numbered 2,500 in 1925 and now they are more than double that.
I think we should be chary as to demolition until we are certain that we have
the amount of accommodation that we require to deal with this overcrowding. During last year Aberdeen built 578 houses, and in February scheduled 316 for demolition. That means an increase of 252 houses on the year, which will certainly not meet the increase in overcrowding. Certainly some shelter is better than none. We have the tent dwellers to deal with. At the end of last summer they were a terrible problem. Some of them no doubt came from sublets from Which they had been turned out for arrears of rent. When winter came on no provision could be made for them. All the accommodation was fully taxed. If severe weather had come on early, there would have been fatalities. As it was there were cases of illness through exposure. This year the problem is likely to be worse still. Last year it was met simply through the fact that a large jute works happened to close shortly before. Temporary accommodation was made available, arid 47 families were put up there. That will not happen this year. I think the Department should be very careful how it sanctions demolition in cities where overcrowding is exceedingly rife, as it is with us. These are points which do not detract from the congratulations due to the Secretary of State for the satisfactory progress that is being made in housing. I hope that he will be able to increase our building capacity as the years go on and that before long we may see a different picture from what is presented to-day.

5.15 p.m.

Mr. McGOVERN: I am rather sorry to be the first to strike a discordant note, with perhaps the exception of the hon. Member for Govan (Mr. Maclean), after the speeches which have been made congratulating the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary in connection with the progress which has been made in relation to housing. Hon. Members can find means for congratulation if they are anxious to overlook the facts which exist in our midst and to take part in a sort of pleasant Sunday afternoon meeting where they pat one another on the back and tell each other how well they are doing, and then, on going outside, realise that they have been acting the hypocrite inside the assembly and saying that which is not true. I refuse to accept the point of view which is always maintained in this House when a Minister gets up at
that Box and attempts to contrast the figures of the previous year with those of the present year. He says, "We have surpassed the figure of last year by 200," and then proceeds to congratulate himself and his Government on what has been achieved. If hon. Members were only brought into direct touch and relationship with the houses which are tolerated in our midst, they would not congratulate Ministers in this House and express satisfaction at the progress which has been made. I make that statement with regard to any Government. No satisfactory progress has been made in connection with housing. The hon. Member for South Edinburgh (Sir S. Chapman) said that 50 years ago he heard an eminent statesman speak in the same spirit as has been in evidence at that Box to-day. If progress in the next 50 years be as rapid as that during the 50 years of which he spoke, I am sure that people living 50 years hence will have no reason to congratulate themselves upon the progress made.
The attitude of mind of the people in this country is amazing. I have never been able to understand it. The whole nation just now has been aroused by what is called a trunk murder. A man has committed a "trunk murder." He has destroyed a human life, and the whole nation is roused to a spirit of frenzy and passion, and, I believe, rightly so. I do not attempt to say that that is a wrong thing. When you contrast the fact that an individual is being pursued with the whole power and authority of the law and the nation, with the power of the Press of the country offering large monetary inducements to people to divulge information which may lead to the arrest or conviction of the person responsible for that murder, with the fact that we are allowing to exist slums which are destroying the lives of children by tens of thousands, and allowing people to draw money from those slums instead of prosecuting them, I cannot understand the attitude of mind and the self-satisfaction which exist in this country.
When we require. money for the Air Force, as we shall do shortly, we get it without question because of the overwhelming number of Government supporters in this House. When we want money for military and naval escapades, we get it, because it is for the purpose of defending the selfish bondholding
interests of the ruling classes of the country. The Noble Lord the Member for Perth (Lord Scone) smiles. He has a good stake in the country and can afford to smile. When money is required to defend the interests of these people it is readily forthcoming. But when money is wanted in order to defend the life and limb of the people who have contributed their all and have helped to create the wealth which others enjoy, it is given in a niggardly, cheeseparing fashion. Every penny is scrutinised and examined and put under a miscroscope before it is allowed to go through.
The way to deal with the housing problem is to appoint a Minister and to say to him, "Your job, without any restrictions by the slum landlords or landowners, is to re-house the overcrowded population and the slum dwellers of the country, irrespective of the cost or the inconvenience. If in five or ten years you cannot show us that you have re-housed the whole of the overcrowded and slum population of this country, you will be led out and placed against a wall to face a firing squad. You will pay the penalty because of your lack of ability in that direction." That is the way to deal with the housing problem. You should not give Ministers the opportunity of going down and meeting local authorities, and having luncheon or tea with the Lord Provost and a nice round-table talk about what they are prepared to do. I am not saying this of the present Secretary of State, but of all people in these positions. They go down generally to meet the people who are anxious to draw money from slums, or who have bonds in slums or some special selfish interest in the continuance of slums in our cities. I would not allow local authorities or the sanitary and health departments to have the last word with regard to the houses which require to be destroyed. The hon. Member for North Aberdeen (Mr. Burnett) came direct to the point when he said that we should not schedule houses for demolition before we bad provided the houses in which to re-house the people. That is exactly the condition that has kept us where we are to-day. If we had said to the local authority, "Your duty is to provide 30,000 houses in five years' time, and if you do not do it we will put up the houses and charge you with the cost in your area," we should have got further than we have done to-day.
The hon. Gentleman mentioned flying squads rushing round the country seeing to the erection of houses. What is wanted to work in co-operation with a flying squad is a bombing squad—that is where the Air Force is required—to go round and, after warning tenants in the slum areas, bomb those areas and destroy them as being a danger to the life of the people of the country. would appoint a medical man who under the supervision of the Scottish Office, should go round independently of local authorities and schedule for demolition houses in which it is not fit for human beings to live. We find that the health department of the local authority acts in conjunction and co-operation with the housing committee. A responsible man in Glasgow said to me, "We cannot condemn. We agree that a large number of the houses are not fit for human habitation, but we cannot condemn them because there are no houses in which to accommodate the people."
Certain interests in the local authorities are anxious that no houses should be built at all because they would compete with the slum type of house in which they are interested. There are two sections even in the Tory party on the local administrative authority. There are the contracting elements who want houses built so long as they obtain the contract for the building of them, and there are those who own the slums and do not want new houses because the people would then leave their slums and go into better houses. There is a tug-of-war between these sections. It used to be a joke in Glasgow that the convenor on the Housing Committee was a building contractor, and that there was a. master plumber, a master glazier, a master joiner, a master painter, and somebody else representing paints and oils, and slates, and, in fact every type of thing one could mention. They were people, if one cared to say it, who were more anxious to direct attention to their selfish interests than they were to the interests of the community.
The Under-Secretary has said that the number of houses scheduled for demolition as unfit for habitation was 61,000 for the whole of Scotland. I could almost find that number in Glasgow alone. could show the Secretary of State individual houses, and say to him, "What
do you think of that?" and I believe that he would say without hesitation, "It ought not to be tolerated in a civilised community." It is simply throwing dust in the eyes of the Committee when the Department attempts to make us believe that 61,000 houses are all that are required. I have sent a. letter to-day to the housing department in Glasgow dealing with a case of overcrowding in which there are 14 people living in a two-roomed house. The man in question has had his application before the authorities for a considerable period, but overcrowding has not been dealt with. It is no good the Minister standing at that Box and saying, "We had an Act last year, but it has failed, and we think that something else will have to be done in the Autumn or next Summer."
I do not care what kind of Government tackles this question. No Government in recent times has had greater authority than the present Government to deal with these problems because they have the greatest majority ever experienced by any Government. Their supporters are prepared with lamblike docility to accept anything if the Government only say that it is a proper and necessary thing for the good of the nation. If the work were entrusted to me, and I was told, "You have 10 years in which to do the job, and we will give you complete liberty to go ahead with the rehousing of the whole of the overcrowded and slum population," I would stake my life on the completion of the task. It can be carried through, but it cannot be carried through merely by saying that something is being done year after year to meet the problem. I have only been in this House four years, but year after year I have heard the same type of speeches, with hon. Members always getting up and patting the Minister on the back and telling him that he is a good fellow and is doing a great work.
The hon. Member for North Aberdeen spoke of the offences which occur in society, of which nobody knows better than the legal Members of this House. The hon. Member for Stirling and Falkirk (Mr. J. Reid) and the hon. and learned Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stevenson) and others attend the courts more regularly than ever I can hope to do, but I have been a sufficient number of times to be convinced that a great deal of the immorality in society to-day arises
from the fact that there is no separate accommodation for the male members of the household. I know of one case where five people slept in one bed, all of them adults. The stepdaughter gave birth to a child. All these people had to sleep in one bed. It is not the father who is responsible but society that is responsible for what is going on, and you are tolerating it. You have the power and the authority. These helpless people cannot help themselves. They are living under these terrible conditions. You have been given the authority and the power to deal with the housing problem, but each successive Government has failed to deal with it in a proper manner.
I would ask hon. Members to recollect the great drive that there was during the War to destroy life. If only 50 per cent. of that drive were put into the saving of human life, we should accomplish something in our day and generation. I urge the Minister not to be carried away by the statement that there has been a great work accomplished. You have not touched the fringe of the problem. The 1913 houses are now 21 years old. There is a continual increase in the population which has to be dealt with. Overcrowding and the slums have to be dealt with. The Government come along and say, "We have built something like 20,000 houses, and we congratulate ourselves that we are doing a great job." I do not think that they are doing a great job. It is no satisfaction to me to hear the Minister say that they have built 250 more houses this year than last year. I have never been able to get any satisfaction out of compliments of that kind. Each successive Minister "Should be tested, just as a tradesman is tested by an ordinary employer. The tradesman is expected to do his best in his job. If he is not an efficient tradesman, he is thrown out, without consideration of the consequences. I would apply the same test to the Minister who is responsible for housing. I would give the Minister power, or I would give some man authority to deal with housing. I would say: "It is your job to rehouse the slum population and the overcrowded population. I will give you 10 years, if you like." The penalty on that housing director if he failed to accomplish the job would be the firing squad.
I could comment on many other things in the report, but I agree that the
housing problem is of the most tremendous importance to the people. I am not prepared to argue that those who are providing houses, 5,000 or 6,000 houses, for selling, are not meeting a certain demand; they are. I give them credit for everything that is being accomplished. We were criticised during the Kilmarnock election. It was said that the Independent Labour party members had the rents fixed too low and that no houses would be built. Our answer is not that the rent was fixed too low but that the subsidy was too low. If the subsidy had been higher we could have given to many thousands of people the satisfaction and guarantee of a home. Mankind requires a home. It is all very well for the hon. Member for North Aberdeen to talk about tents. Those who have built mansions and palaces for the rich to live in cannot to-day get houses to live in. They create wealth. We talk in this House about doing something for the poorer classes. I say to hon. Members, the poorer classes have housed you. Surely, they are entitled to be housed themselves.
I appeal to the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary, who have shown initiative and drive, to apply their minds to the housing problem and to remember that there are tens of thousands of children who are being destroyed every year for lack of a decent house to live in, for lack of sun and air. Children go to school with their minds dulled, unable to do the task allotted to them because they have not had proper rest and sleep in a foul, deadly-laden atmosphere. I ask the Minister to remember that he has the power, and if he has the drive he can provide houses for people. Scotland is looking to the Scottish Office to get a drive on, to arise from its lethargy and to recognise that they have a public conscience behind them. For 20 or 30 years the job was to arouse the spirit of the nation to a conscious interest in housing. That spirit has been aroused and Ministers have only to get into harness and to get on with the job. I appeal to them to get on with the work of rehousing the population and giving some comfort to the miserable thousands who to-day are living under conditions which are not fit for the brute beasts of the field.

5.37 p.m.

Miss H0RSBRUGH: I thoroughly agree with the remark of the hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) when he said that Scotland is looking to the Secretary of State to deal as it has never been dealt with before with the housing problem of Scotland. From all parts of the House men and women of all parties are anxious to see this problem dealt with and are realising the appalling conditions in which so many of our fellow citizens live to-day. The difficulty is not merely the realisation of that fact but the method by which the problem is to be solved. The hon. Member for Shettleston suggested that it might be done in 10 years. I do not believe that it is necessary to have a firing squad at the end of 10 years, because I do not believe that any firing squad could give more energy and more desire to cope with the problem than we have realised exists in the hearts and minds of the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Under-Secretary.
The Under-Secretary mentioned certain figures concerning the general health of Scotland. I would stress those figures, because we have to take into account the general health of the people when we are discussing the housing problem. The Under-Secretary pointed out that there were certain definite improvements. It ought to be known what improvements have taken place, because it is sometimes said, by those who either have not carefully studied the question or are not very careful in the statements they make, that during the years of stress and economic difficulties the health of the people has been neglected. The figures that we have before us show that that is not the case. Maternal mortality has decreased to 5.9 per 1,000 and infant mortality has gone down to 81 per 1,000. We want to see those figures reduced, but we are thankful to reach the present figures. I am, however, sorry to see that the figure for infant mortality in Dundee is 98 per 1,000, but I would point out that that figure when stated in the Department of Health Report is linked up with a statement that there were a great many cases in the early part of the year of peumonia and bronchitis. More and more we have to realise that if we are to tackle this health problem and this problem of the death of young children under one year from pneumonia,
bronchitis and such diseases, we cannot tackle it if we allow them to remain in slum dwellings, which are underground in a great many cases.
In regard to the mortality figures relating to children from one to five years of age there has been an improvement. It is interesting also to note that the figures for those below average nutrition are rather better than they were in the years 1928, 1929 and 1930. Therefore, it cannot be said in future that during the economic stress the health of the people of Scotland has been neglected. Of course, we should like to see it better, but we should be encouraged, and I think the Department of Health should be congratulated because of the way in which these difficulties have been dealt with. Here I should like to pay a tribute to the work of the health visitors and the work done by the maternity and child welfare clinics. Eighty-six per cent. of the babies born have been visited in their homes by health visitors. I note also that children are being brought to the child welfare centres earlier than used to be the case, and I am glad to see—having quoted something from the report that was not to the advantage of Dundee —that in Dundee 55 per cent. of the children are brought to the centres before they are two months old. This work is beginning to show itself in the health of our people. I would point out, however, that the workers at these centres are battling against fearful odds which I am afraid they will have to battle against so long as the people of Scotland are housed as they are. Forty per cent. of the deaths of the children over one month and under one year are from such diseases as pneumonia and bronchitis. I know of cases in Dundee and other cities where these unfortunate children are brought up in damp surroundings. If we can only get the people into decent houses we shall help more than can be done in any other way to give the children of Scotland the chance that they have the right to demand of growing up strong and healthy citizens. It is because of that fact that I welcome the figures that have been quoted.
We have been hearing to-day of the start of a great housing push. I am thankful that the Government began their scheme by asking for a definite programme for slum clearance before they
asked for overcrowding estimates. I say that, because I believe that no local authority will as willingly undertake the work of demolition as well as building at the same time as they will of simply building new houses. It is far easier for the local authority to build new houses only than it is to demolish and build. If we do not get the demolition ahead in our big cities we are going to waste some of the best sites that we have to-day. Hon. Members who know our great cities in Scotland will agree that sometimes right in the centre of our cities we have terrible slums, close behind close and back lands, where the light is hardly ever seen. These places have to be razed to the ground and decent tenements substituted with playgrounds for children and other up-to-date amenities which will help another generation to grow up in entirely different surroundings from the' scandalous conditions which prevail to-day.
Without blaming in any way any local authority for hesitation in dealing with the difficulties that we are up against I do feel anxious as to the amount of progress that is being made and is going to be made even with slum clearance. I realise what an enormous task we are tackling. We are tackling something that has never been tackled in this country before. We have to look to the future ready with new schemes, new types of houses, new plans and I am not at all sure if we are realising what an enormous project we are starting upon. I am not sure that it is going to be for the welfare of the people and of our local authorities if each local authority is to become the biggest landlord of the city. I am not at all sure if the elected body will not find great difficulty in regard to the pressure that will be brought upon them if the power of letting is to rest with the local authorities. I visualise that it may be necessary more and more to draw in other societies and other individuals in order to help in dealing with this problem.
We have heard to-day that slum clearance schemes have been suggested dealing with about 92 per cent. of the slums. Many of us have been anxious about these slum clearance programmes, and I hope are to be dissipated. May I give some figures of the town I know best, Dundee. The number of houses condemned was 3,603, and the number of houses to deal
with overcrowding and the growth in population was estimated to be 1,500, to be built in five years. When the programme was put in I did not see 3,603 houses as the number to be built to make up the number of condemned houses. Anyone who knows Dundee knows that there is an immense amount of property which is entirely unifit for human habitation. I found that the figure put in the programme was 2,000 houses and that it was also intended to build 500 of what they called superior houses for those now living in overcrowded conditions. A change in the figures may have been made during the last few months, but I should like the Under-Secretary to tell us whether in the programme for Dundee the figure of 3,603 has been reached or if they are being content with 2,000 houses.
My difficulty is that many local authorities say that they are building at present up to their full capacity. When I approached the local authorities in Dundee on the subject of 2,500 houses as against 3,603, I was told that this figure was put in because more than that number could not be built in the city during five years. I was told that they could not build more than 500 houses in a year, but last year we reached 606, and in 1927 that figure was passed. I am rather anxious on this matter. Even when we have got slum clearance programmes in which will really clear the slums we have then to find out how the houses are to be built for those in overcrowded areas and to meet the actual growth in population. If local authorities are now building to their full capacity how does the Secretary of State intend that they shall build also to deal with overcrowding, and the growth of the population? Are other schemes going to be suggested to local authorities? Are they going to be told to organise their building, to organise building labour, so that the question may be tackled as it should be tackled. I want to see everybody who can build houses, private enterprise, public utility societies, and everybody else, getting all the possible help that the Government can give. We should encourage everybody to come in.
I want to know whether there are schemes for organising the operatives in the building trade, because if we are to be told that local authorities are building to capacity and then see at Employ-
ment Exchanges men in the building trade unemployed and drawing their allowances, it is a situation which calls for really drastic action. It may be said by some critics, it may be the answer from the Secretary of State, to those who are pressing for more building and quicker building, why such a hurry. From a financial point of view the quicker we build the better, money is cheap, and local authorities in their slum clearance schemes get 80 per cent. of their loss paid by the Exchequer. But I would suggest that we should try to get a larger number of houses built each year because we are not tackling a problem which can be put off, it is a most urgent problem, it has to do with the lives of human beings.
May I remind the Secretary of State of the visit which he paid to Dundee last September. He did not merely meet those who are owners of property or those who have to do with the building trade, he went from house to house, through some of the worst slums, talked with the people and saw their conditions. I do not think I need remind him of those conditions. I remember pointing out to him in a particularly dark hovel, I can call it nothing else, in Dalfield Walk, miserable white-faced children, one child had been bitten by a rat the day before. Those were the conditions which the Secretary of State saw for himself last September, and I tell him that these people are living there to-day, and I fear they may be living there next year or even the year after unless we can accelerate the building of houses by ensuring that local authorities shall get every possible assistance, and by organising the building trade, bringing in more people to help in building. This is a problem which cannot be delayed.
I was glad to hear the Under-Secretary say that overcrowding is going to be dealt with. The provisions of the 1930 Act with regard to improvement areas might have been used with good effect, but the fact remains that they have not been so used, therefore, other schemes to deal with overcrowding must be brought in. The overcrowded conditions in some of our cities and towns are well known, and perhaps it may be unnecessary to give more statistics after what the hon. Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Burnett) has said, but these facts and figures ought to
be known because many people who talk about housing difficulties have not seen them for themselves and do not realise the position. If they did they would no longer stand outside but would come in and give every possible support to the present Government in its programme and the initiation of a movement the like of which we have never before known in Scotland. I know a case of a two-roomed house in which are living mother and father, five sons, aged 15, 16, 14, 10, and eight, and four daughters, aged 23, 12 and 11. This case was brought to my notice by the mother coming to see me and urging that something should be done, because another son was coming home shortly on leave from the Army and she did not know where to put him. I could give case after case.
In the report of the sanitary inspector for Dundee of December, 1933, there was the case of a one-roomed house occupied by husband and wife, twin sons, aged 8, and four daughters, aged 13, 12, 10, 7. In another case a one-roomed house was occupied by husband and wife, husband's mother, four sons aged 10, 9, 7 and 2 and one daughter aged 4. There was the case of a two-roomed house occupied by husband and wife, five sons aged 18, 14, 9, 6 and 4, and five daughters aged 21, 16, 12, 10 and one year. Is this a state of affairs which can be tolerated any longer in Scotland? I suggest that in every possible way we should accelerate the programme of building put forward by the Government. Much more remains to be done in the organisation of building.
A good deal of the difficulty in overcrowding has come from what I may call a rigid tenancy of houses. Owing to the control which was necessary after the War, people moved from one house to another much less frequently, but the idea is quite wrong that people should remain all their lives in the same place. We must try, with a greater number of houses, to see that families change from house to house as their needs and requirements increase. I am told by a friend that in the old days when it came to 28th May or the 28th November the conversation was, "Are you flitting or sitting?" They had some place to flit to. We want houses of all sizes, small and large, the more families can interchange the better. For some time I was much alarmed because in Dundee there
were so many people on the slum clearance areas, small families or single people, who could not be accommodated in the new three-roomed house. A request was made to the Under-Secretary for a greater number of two-roomed houses, the type of house which these people wanted, and which would be adequate for their requirements. But we discovered in Dundee that there were 9,000 or 10,000 two-roomed houses, about 8,000 of them are overcrowded. I believe that much more could be done by voluntary associations to help people to find out when smaller houses and the larger houses are being vacated, and get a better interchange.
The situation in Dundee was such that I was told that in March of this year there were 135 of the Corporation houses ready and unoccupied as there were no suitable tenants from the slums to go into them. I am happy to say that I have received a telegram to-day from Dundee saying that only 15 of these three- roomed houses are now unoccupied. It seemed to me that this must be due to lack in organisation. If there are in Dundee over 3,000 condemned houses, there is all the more necessity for careful organisation so that people should be moved into the new houses at the earliest opportunity. The fact that the houses are to remain controlled under a rental of £26 5s. will help people to change their houses. I should like to say something with regard to the Rural Workers Act of 1926 and the houses which have been reconditioned under it. The Under- Secretary pointed out that this has been of great advantage in Scotland, especially during last year. As we are hoping that we shall have a greater scheme of re- conditioning in the towns as well, may f point out what a real success the scheme of reconditioning has been in the country. Real good work has been done, houses have been saved and made good houses by the subsidies which have been given, and I hope that this fact will be borne in mind when legislation is introduced to deal with reconditioning in the towns.
In congratulating the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary on the start they have made I have endeavoured to stress the necessity for greater acceleration in the building of houses. The matter is far more urgent than many people realise. The types of houses
should be given more consideration. The fact that smaller three-roomed houses can be built at very little more than the cost of two-roomed houses should also be borne in mind by local authorities. We ought to see when we have demolished the slums that a better type of flat or tenement is built in the centre of our towns and cities. I know that these higher flats or tenement houses may not be considered the better scheme from a financial point of view, but I would point out that the tenant in these houses would be closer to his work and that the greater cost of transport which they may have to add to their weekly rent would not have to be faced, as it would be if they are sent far out. In smaller towns this is not a difficulty, but in the bigger cities it has to be faced if we are to visualise a real start in the provision of these much needed houses. We must see that we build up as well as build out. Otherwise, the workers will find that they have to face not only the expense of rent but the expense of transport.
We want more imagination in our building and more experiments. We have a wonderful chance of doing something that will really mark a new era for the people of Scotland. We have been told of all the difficulties and evils of overcrowding. It is well that we should sometimes look to the future and not think only of the evils of the present—think of what a glorious Scotland could be built for the future. The hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) said that the compliments paid to-day to the Secretary of State reminded him of a pleasant Sunday afternoon and that it seemed to him sheer hypocrisy. I do not agree that those compliments were hypocrisy. I think it is a pleasant Wednesday afternoon to come here and hear that statement of the Under-Secretary of State, because I believe we are starting on a campaign for the better housing of the people of Scotland which will go down to history as the greatest achievement perhaps of a great National Government.

6.2 p.m.

Mr. KIRKWO0D: I have sat throughout the Debate and listened to all the speeches. One and all of the speakers have been anxious to pay a tribute to the Secretary of State and to the Under-Secretary for the way in which they are
trying to face the difficult problems in Scotland at the moment; but even the junior Member for Dundee (Miss Horsbrugh) and the hon. Member for North Aberdeen (Mr. Burnett), to say nothing of the hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern), had to show the changed conditions under which the people of Scotland live, move and have their being. The hon. Member for Dundee gave us evidence that children were being bitten by rats. Imagine human beings to-day, with all our enlightenment, living under conditions such as those, with parents remaining awake all night to keep off the rats. They are shocking conditions. But before I sit down I shall show the Committee that we really have made some advance, and that all the money that is being spent on social services is of tremendous value to everyone concerned, and that Scotland to-day is giving a good account of itself along those lines.
Let me say a few words in reference to the speech of the right hon. Member for Caithness (Sir A. Sinclair). I can never forget that it is not so long ago that he was Secretary of State for Scotland. Immediately he started on that job he attacked the problem of housing and went all over Scotland, backed by the present Under-Secretary, and carried out a tearing and raging campaign to arouse the local authorities out of their apathy, and to get them to build houses. In the midst of that campaign Clydebank Town Council petitioned the right hon. Gentleman to be allowed to go on with the building of houses because of overcrowding. Clydebank Town Council by no stretch of imagination could have been called a Socialist town council, and it unanimously passed a resolution in favour of the building of houses as a means of dealing with overcrowding. The right hon. Member for Caithness, in the midst of all his platitudes and his anxiety about housing, turned that petition down.

Mr. SK ELTON: I must not be dissociated from responsibility for that.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: It was turned down, but in their anxiety the Clydebank Town Council came up here and interviewed the Secretary of State. The individuals who organised against these houses being built were the same individuals who are responsible for the awful housing conditions in Scotland to-day. The factors
were the individuals who were responsible. But the whole of the people of Clydebank were anxious, and I did all I could, used all the pressure and influence I could, in this House. But the right hon. Member for Caithness was adamant and would not consent. Probably all the reasons that he gave against the proposal then are now done away with, because we have 9,000 more people employed in Clydebank than we had at that time.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: I make no complaint of the hon. Member referring to this subject, but he did not give me notice that he intended to do so, and I cannot claim therefore that I have looked up the papers and refreshed my memory of this incident, which took place two years or more ago. I am obliged to my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary for saying that he is not dissociated from responsibility, but I accept the ultimate responsibility for the decision which was given. It is true that I resisted this demand, and it is true that the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) pressed it; and there is no hon. Member who is more difficult to resist. But the proposal that was put before us was not a proposal to build houses in order to deal with the problem of overcrowding. The proposal which was put before us was a general proposal for building houses in Clydebank, which we did not think was justified in the circumstances of Clydebank. We made it clear to the people %ciao came to us that if they would submit a proposal to deal with overcrowding it would receive our most careful and sympathetic consideration.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I would thank the right hon. Gentleman for his words, because they will give me more power to go to the Scottish Office and see that we get this concession. The junior Member for Dundee said that there were certain people who could not get into the house: of three apartments. The reason was that they could not pay the rent. Therefore, they required to get smaller houses. That is the argument that has been put up to us in Scotland.

Miss HORSBRUGH: I do not think I even mentioned rent. There were certain people, such as a couple or a person living alone, who were the very people we ought to get into the two-roomed
houses, and then remove the overcrowded people into the three-roomed houses.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: That is a matte: which I took up with the Dundee Town Council before the junior Member for Dundee came into this House. Dundee has always clamoured for houses at rents which people could pay. Even the town council appealed for two-apartment houses. When we came here in 1920 and appealed to the then Government to see to it that the smallest house that could be built in Scotland was a three-apartment house with all modern conveniences, Dundee was up against us because it said that the people could not afford these houses. We must build houses and see to it that people get wages which enable them to pay the rents. It is possible under the present regime at the Scottish Office to get round the problem of housing. The town of Kilsyth has done it. Kilsyth at the moment is building five-apartment houses, and some of them are occupied. They are let at 5s. 9d. a week, taxes included. Four-apartment houses are 4s. 6d. a week, and three-apartment houses 3s. 6d. a week. They are houses with all modern conveniences. The council put a wooden bedstead into each room, and each house was supplied with a wringing machine. They are doing all that in Kilsyth at the moment, not in Russia or Germany. If this were being done in some other place it would he broadcast all over the world as something wonderful. We can do it in Scotland and we are doing it.
I want the Secretary of State to let all Scotland know what is being done in Kilsyth, because it can be done elsewhere under the 1930 Act. They get £17 10s. a year subsidy under the 1930 Act for a five-apartment house, and for three- and four-apartment houses they get £12 10s. a year subsidy. I am satisfied that if more of the people of Scotland knew what it is possible to do, they would see that their local authorities put the Act into operation as Kilsyth has done. Kilsyth has faced the problem of re-housing the people in a very intelligent way. It is realised what is the great difficulty of re-housing in the west of Scotland. When people are taken out of the slums and from bad housing conditions to new houses, the new houses call for a higher rent than the people have paid hitherto. Apart from that higher rent, there are innumerable things
required that the folk cannot buy because they have not the money to buy them. They have been accustomed to one-apartment houses, and in those single apartments has been all their gear. When they go to a three-apartment house they have to get new furniture but have not the money to buy it. We have contended in this House time and time again that that was one of the difficulties, that when we take these very poor people out of the slums we only aggravate their condition, because they starve themselves and do without food in order to pay the rent.
Again Kilsyth has got over that difficulty. It has a municipal bank. We are doing all we can to do away with private enterprise, for if ever there was a case in which private enterprise beyond a shadow of doubt has been a failure, it is in the housing of the people. Nothing came of the Bill on which so much valuable time was spent by this House last year, because that Bill left the work to private enterprise and private enterprise cannot do it. Through the municipal bank the people of Kilsyth arrange to pay the rent, and the bank supplies them with bed and bedding. The people are now getting decent beds and bedsteads, such as they never had before, because formerly they had to be content with the cast-off articles of other people. Now they are getting new articles.
I hope, therefore, that the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary will let all the local authorities in Scotland know what is being done in Kilsyth, because what is being done there can be done elsewhere. As a result of this re-housing scheme, there has been a remarkable improvement in the standard of health in the community. I was among these people for an afternoon. I addressed about 4,000 or 5,000 of them, and practically the whole town turned out, and I never saw healthier children anywhere. We have to remember that this is one of the towns on which unemployment has lain like a blight. It is in one of the mining areas, but, as a result of the problem being handled in an intelligent fashion, they are working through their difficulties, and they have achieved results which are a credit to all concerned.
With regard to the wider aspect of housing, I am able to carry my memory back for 50 years. I can recall the awful
housing conditions in which the working class of Scotland lived 50 years. ago. We have changed all that to-day. We are now building what I always advocated, namely, houses outside the towns. We are building new towns. We are building a New Jerusalem, and leaving the landlords their old houses. They are moving heaven and earth to support this idea of reconditioning, but the people of to-day desire a better type of house than they were content with 30, 40, or 50 years ago. They want a higher standard of life, and a higher standard of life is attainable by the people of Scotland to-day, even making due allowance for unemployment and poverty and everything else. The people of Scotland never were as well-looking or as healthy as they are to-day. There never was a better type of man and woman in Scotland than there is today, morally, mentally and in every other way.

Sir WILFRID SUGDEN: Capitalism!

Mr. KIRKWOOD: It is in spite of capitalism. I have spent some time at the commencement of my speech in order to show what has been done in a little township with no capitalists in it. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] Not in the general sense of the term. It is a mining community governed largely by miners who work in the pits throughout the day—when they get the chance—and administer the laws of their country at night. Their council meetings 'are held at night, and I have described what they are doing, in spite of private enterprise. They have had those difficulties to overcome. If we regard the condition of public health in Scotland to-day from the point of view of an observer of the conditions which prevailed 50 years ago, we are bound to regard the progress which has been made in that period as little short of a miracle. Fifty years ago terrible diseases which the people did not understand were described as the vengeance of the Almighty. Many of those diseases we have now eradicated. It is not very long ago since ministers of the Gospel were asking the Government of the time to declare a fasting day because there was an epidemic of 'smallpox. When the "middens" were cleared away, smallpox was cleared away in the process.
Public health services have had a very severe test during the past few years,
and they have come through that test with remarkable success. I find in the case of my own city that in spite of the depression, economic and mental, of the past few years, the disease of phthisis continues to decline and that the non-pulmonary type of tuberculosis has declined in proportion. During the past year there has been a definite drop in both. We are now reaping the beneficent results of early restrictive and progressive measures. Tuberculosis has declined as the public health administration has improved. The establishment of welfare centres and clinics with facilities for tuition and training, with the provision of advice and nourishment, has produced a general improvement in the public health while the change in the housing conditions, although yet very incomplete, has already had its effect. When the "backlands" were swept away, a mortal blow was aimed at Glasgow's scourge—rickets—and when rickets disappeared the virulence of other diseases diminished, because the people affected were better able to resist those diseases. Scarlet fever, though still prevalent, has become so mild during the past 20 years that the mortality rate is now less than 1 per cent.
The disease of measles, which in former days was frequently fatal, has also become mild and, more remarkable still, is the fact that whereas in the old days this disease was a scourge particularly to infant children, nowadays, though it still affects infant children in the congested tenement areas, it does not affect them to the same extent in the new housing areas, and is largely confined to children of school age. This is demonstrated by the fact that the death rate among children between the ages of one and five has dropped like a plummet. I am not exaggerating when I say that for every death among children between the ages of one and five to-day there were five deaths 50 years ago. Moreover some of the diseases which produced the effects of blindness and lameness are now almost eradicated. It is not possible to compute the number of people who became blind formerly as a result of the disease known as ophthalmia neonatorum. Twenty years ago it was estimated at that time that 100 people became blind every year in Glasgow from that disease. During the past 10 years, as a result of early treatment by public health authori-
ties, the fear of blindness from that cause has been completely removed.
The importance of this change m public health conditions ought to be realised by those who consider that we are going too far in the provision of social services. We have a declining birth rate, but by means of our social services we are reducing the death rate in a ratio greater than the decline in the birth rate. The time may come when industry itself will be grateful for the public health services and, apart from industry altogether, it is a notable thing, and a cause for pride, that the health and stature of the children of to-day should be so much improved compared with former years. We are developing a race which is better able to withstand the onslaught of disease, and, at the same time, we are taking measures to wipe out the diseases themselves. It happens to be my lot often to stand at the gates of some of our big factories and to watch thousands of workers coming from work. When I stand at Singers' works and see the young women coming out—and the young men, too—1 cannot help recalling the words:
A thing of beauty is a joy for ever.
I cannot help contrasting the workers of to-day with the workers of 50 years ago. When I was a young apprentice engineer I saw them in the old days, when young women went to work in the mills with practically nothing but coats and shawls on them. They had not then. reached the length of having dresses, never mind hats, and they presented a melancholy appearance as they went to and from their daily work. Now the scene is changed. The workers of to-day, both men and women, are a credit to our country, and that change has been 'brought about largely as a result of the money which we have spent on social services and on education. We have produced a different type. A great revolution has taken place, and it has taken place without the shedding of blood. We ought to be proud of the rate at which we have travelled on the road of progress and of what we have accomplished. The money spent on education and social services has been well spent. Those who can remember what the working class people of Scotland were like 50 years ago, have only to take a walk through one of our great industrial centres to-day
in order to be impressed with the great change for the better which has occurred.[...]
I want on this occasion to urge the Secretary of State for Scotland to go ahead with that good work. Expenditure on social services pays in the long run. What does it matter about the money? We are always being told that these reforms cost so much. There are people here who ate against subsidies of any description, but it is all a ease of subsidy. Unemployment insurance is a subsidy. Everything of this kind that we get is a subsidy. We are subsidising the provision of houses. Expenditure for these purposes is the 'safest investment which the country can make. In return for all this expenditure, we are producing a better type of citizen. It is only 100 years since the first grant was given by Parliament for education. That grant was opposed as tenaciously in 1833 as a matter of millions would be opposed to-day and the amount was only £20,000. It was predicted that such a grant would bankrupt the country, and at that time 75 per cent. of the boys and girls in England and Wales, up to 14 years of age, could neither read nor write. Just think of the change that has taken place as a result of what we have been trying to do. We are to-day mopping up the mess of generations, and the reward of the past 50 years is adequate proof to the Government that money spent on housing and health services is the best investment, as far as national resources are concerned.

6.30 p.m.

Mr. KENNETH LINDSAY: I do not wish to detain the Committee long, as many other hon. Members wish to speak, and I believe I air the junior Member from Scotland present. We have had a welter of congratulations of the Government from the Opposition benches, and it has been very pleasant to get the kind of perspective that the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) has given us of the last 100 years. The hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) did not, however, put forward a single constructive suggestion during the whole of his speech, and the most critical speech has come from this side, from the junior Member for Dundee (Miss Horsbrugh), who is not now present. I was particularly interested in her speech, because it seemed to me that every now
and then she was getting down to what I consider the root of this question. I think we ought to be frank about it. The 1933 Act has not worked, either on one side or the other. I believe the Under-Secretary of State gave the number of 1,200 houses under the £3 subsidy, and about one-eighth of those are in Kilmarnock, but we are not going to build any more, for a variety of reasons. First of all, although there were 1,200 applications for these houses, 800 of them had to be refused, because the incomes were in excess of the statutory amount. Secondly, the income test has been found extremely difficult to apply in practice, and the large families, with three, four or five children, very often come just over the £3, which again makes it difficult. I am not sure whether 6s., plus 2s. 3d. for occupier's rates, is not too much for families with an income of between £2 and £3 a week. The loss to the authority works out at about £3 5s. per house. The other part of the Act, we have already been told, has produced 260 houses.
It is very difficult to have this Debate to-day, because the most valuable report, which we have all read, is waiting to be implemented in the new proposals. The right hon. and gallant Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir A. Sinclair), who spoke from the Liberal benches, gave an entirely wrong impression. He said that because there were temporarily, as I agree, a smaller number of houses being produced during these last months, therefore the Government's policy was all wrong. I think their policy is perfectly sound. I did some arithmetic while the Under-Secretary of State was speaking. He said that 5,000 houses had been built under the 1930 Act during the last six months, and if that be so, that is very nearly getting up to the figure for the whole of last year, which means that the 1930 Act is working cumulatively, and it is bound to do so; but the accusation was that the 1924 Act, the Wheatley Act, ought to have been kept. I daresay the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) would agree, and I quite understand that point of view, though I do not agree with it. The policy of the Government, it seems to me, is perfectly sound in concentrating the whole resources of the local authorities on slum clearance, and in leaving to private enterprise what pri-
vate enterprise can best do. What is going to happen in between? The fact is that there is a rental—it is very hard to get at, but it may be 7s. or 8s. a week—which cannot by any means be built to by private enterprise.
There are a great many schemes about. I have with me here the report which has been prepared by Lord Amulree and a committee of business men. I have myself been concerned with another report, produced in the last two or three months. These reports are flying about, some of them from better sources, some from less good sources, but they are composed by hard business men; and I look upon the Secretary of State for Scotland not only as the Secretary of State, but as the chairman of a vast housing concern, and I congratulate him on the business steps that he has taken, the intimate touch of going around and seeing the localities, and the putting in of this "flying squad." If it were a business concern, we should perhaps not make such a fuss about it, but we should put on a few extra men and say that we were wanting to get on with the job. I share with the junior Member for Dundee some doubts about the extent of the Government machinery in tackling this new part of the problem. There is a certain portion of housing that can be done, at a figure. You have only to look around London and all parts of England and Scotland to see it.
It is no good the hon. Members for Dumbarton Burghs and Shettleston saying that money does not matter. I might agree with them that we ought to spend more—I do—but it is money that is settling the question. It is the difference in money that has produced the economies. It is money first and money last, and a number of us are asking ourselves to-day, when we in this country are giving subsidies of £3,000,000 here and £4,000,000 there, By what criterion do you test the amount of subsidy to be given to one industry or another? I do not want to recite the evils of the slums; anyone can do that, and the hon. Member for Dundee has done it very eloquently. We are all agreed on that, but if this awful situation is likely to go on for many years, it might pay, from a purely business point of view to set up some, I do not say parallel organisation with the local authorities, but some fresh scheme to implement their work, if as a fact they are working up to full capacity
already. I think a parallel authority would be a highly dangerous business. You have the old local machinery working, and there are many other reasons which could involve an inflation of prices unless you had some sort of control.
My last point is this: Some 25 per cent. of the persons in Scotland to-day are unemployed-320,090 odd—and that includes some of those who are able-bodied and under the Poor Law. It is very difficult to tell how many are counted twice, but a tertian number are. You have in Scotland at present not so much a dereliction as a general depression, but one of the things which is making this housing problem in Scotland so doubly difficult is that you must have a lower rent because of a lower wage or absence of wage. In England there is 14.8 per rent. of unemployment which is a very different figure. I sincerely congratulate the right hon. Gentleman because, whatever one says about the past, one must admit that this is a much bigger drive than has ever been made before, and the local authorities, at any rate the good ones, are doing a lot. My own authority is working up to its capacity, and when you have got in one place a maternal mortality rate of 2.6, it shows what is possible. I am sure chat that must be one of the lowest in the whole of Scotland. Therefore, in congratulating the right hon. Gentleman on the initiative that he has given to the slum clearance programme in Scotland, I would ask him, when he comes to this intermediate problem of building houses in overcrowded areas for the smallest wage-earner, to be equally bold. Beyond that I suppose it is impossible to go, because one would have to talk about fresh legislation, but because of the general depression in Scotland and the lower wage, as compared with England, whatever meaures are taken in England we shall have to take probably even bolder measures in Scotland in future.

6.41 p.m.

Mr. BUCHANAN: The hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. K. Lindsay) complained that my hon. Friend the Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) had not made any constructive suggestions, but I waited in vain for any practical proposals by the hon. Member himself, and I must confess that all we got was that we could not quite discuss anything and that things were not ready. May I remind him that
to-day we are discussing administration, and that practical proposals are more or less the subject of Bills? Consequently, if certain hon. Members have failed to give detailed, concrete proposals, it is not their fault, but it is due to the fact that they have had to be concerned with the realities of administration in the past. I thought the hon. Member might have told us exactly what he thought was right and wrong, but he failed to do that. I cannot congratulate the Government on their achievements. They passed an Act quite recently, and their object in doing so was that they thought it would help the housing situation in Scotland. If they did not think there was no need for it, they had no right to pass the Act, but after taking official advice the Government came to the conclusion that they should pass the Act. Nobody forced it on them or demanded it, but they did pass an Act, and to-day, on the admission of the Under-Secretary of State, whatever other drive has been made, whatever other good figures can be shown, their Act has lamentably failed.
Here you are with a situation in Scotland that cannot call forth congratulation, a situation where slumdom is rife, where overcrowding makes decent men and women aghast, where the housing conditions are awful. In these circumstances the Government pass an Act, and in 12 months it is proved that the Act, for the purpose of grappling with these problems, has completely failed. What has this Act done to solve the great problems in the cities and in the rural towns? We were told when the Act was passed that private enterprise would tackle a portion of the problem, to put it no higher than that. Private enterprise has not looked at it; it has not got near the problem. Every local authority, whether dominated by Labour as in Glasgow, or by Conservatives as in Aberdeen, or mixed in their politics, every local authority, whatever be their politics, is agreed that the £3 subsidy is hopeless for the purpose of enabling them to grapple with the housing problem. Let me say a word about the problem of rent. I was the Mover of the Amendment which fixed the rent and which the Government ultimately accepted.

Mr. SKELTON: I do not want to deprive the hon. Member of any kudos to
which he is entitled, but the whole point was whether the sum, having been fixed, should be a minimum.

Mr. BUCHANAN: I agree, but I moved the Amendment and the Government accepted it. The Labour party issued a, leaflet attacking me for doing it. I do not see why fixing low rents should be the subject of an attack. My view is that the rent is not too low, and that for a man with £2 10s. or £3 a week, 6s. is enough for rent. If the Labour people believe in making it a higher rent, let them say so. The question, however, is not that the rent is too low, but that the subsidy is too low. For the workers in many industries 6s. 6d. is not too low. How can a man in a shipyard earning 39s. or £2 a week afford it? His wage is not even that, because it is based on a 52-week year which he never gets. I am not complaining so much about the rent, however. The challenge I make to the Government is that they deliberately introduced a Bill designed to improve the health and well-being of the community which was an insult and totally inadequate for the purpose.
One approaches this problem with feelings of anger, particularly when we have at the Scottish Office two Ministers who must know the problem and have mixed with the problem. While they may not live in slums, they cannot be impervious to what they see as they go about. Surely men cannot walk up and down the streets of cities and towns like Greenock and Perth without seeing the horrible places in which people live. Yet, knowing those conditions, they have deliberately cut down the subsidy introduced by the late John Wheatley, and they do that at a time when the Government are embarking on every form of subsidy. The Government have embarked on a subsidy policy to shovel out millions of pounds to the Cunarder, to tramp ships, beef, Palestine, Newfoundland and beet sugar. At the time they are doing this they are taking the housing subsidy from the people of Scotland who are living in the most shocking conditions. That is not a subject of congratulation, but a subject of the utmost condemnation. The two men in charge of the Scottish Office are guilty of conduct for which they ought to be ashamed of themselves.
The Under-Secretary said they were driving on with slum clearance. I admit
his figures show an improvement. The slum problem is only part of the housing problem. It is a moot point as to what is a slum. There are slum districts which are definitely scheduled as such, but there are other parts which are slums, too, but, because they do not happen to be in an area which is scheduled for a clearance scheme, they are not regarded as slums. The Glasgow City Council say they cannot give a house to a man who is living in shocking conditions in a slum because he is not living in an area scheduled for slum clearance. We have that kind of case every day. I am glad when I see a house built, no matter if it has five or six rooms, because I would rather see a new house than a hew battleship. It represents human life in some form and useful social labour for those who built it. I do not detract from the number of houses that have been built, but I say that the great housing problems in our cities are not being faced and tackled at all. The hon. Member for Kilmarnock will say, "What is your constructive suggestion?" Our proposals need no reiteration. We think that the subsidy ought to be restored to at least its amount when John Wheatley left it. We think that there should be control of prices and that nobody should be allowed to profiteer out of the well-being of the community. We think a housing board should he set up, and that if local authorities do not build, the Government should tackle the problem.
We are faced to-dab with a position in which human life is at stake. A Government faced with that position in time of war would take the most drastic measures. We say that human life is at stake in times of peace and that the Government should take as drastic steps as they would in time of war. I agree with the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) and the hon. Member for Shettleston that to the extent to which we solve the housing problem we gain social advantages in other directions. Many problems arise from overcrowding and shocking housing conditions. A judge recently said in a case involving a sex offence in one of the Scottish courts that the conditions in which the crime was committed were in themselves criminal. The position to-day leaves no room for complacency or congratulation. The Ministers in charge of the Scottish Office have been too easy.
They introduced a Bill and it has been proved wrong, and instead of coming to the House and saying, "We are wrong; we are going to devote the next two days"—not at some time in the future— "righting what is wrong," the Under-Secretary says that new proposals are ahead. They have no right to be ahead; they should be here and now. Instead of talking of the beef subsidy to-morrow, we should be considering the Government's housing proposals for Scotland now. They should retract as honest men now, and not wait while helpless people are suffering in shocking conditions. We shall divide against the Government to-day, small as our numbers are, because we shall wish to recall with satisfaction our protest against the Government's miserable and contemptible tackling of the housing conditions of the people.

6.57 p.m.

Captain ARCHIBALD RAMSAY: I do not want to follow what was said by the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan), but I think he was a little unkind to the hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. K. Lindsay), who had said that the hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) had made no constructive suggestions, for he went on to prove that in his speech by making constructive suggestions himself. No doubt there are many of us who sympathise to some extent with the hon. Member in his remarks, but I think he was a little ungenerous to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State in passing over the fact that, although we had been able to secure a subsidy of only £3 for Scotland, we had been able to get a. subsidy at the time when England secured no subsidy at all. That should have been borne in mind when the hon. Member for Gorbals made his speech. I would ask the Under-Secretary's attention to three points which are of importance locally, of which he may have some knowledge, and in which he should have some official knowledge here. He opened his spech on the subject of water supply and told us that the water schemes submitted to date were of such dimensions that if he gave to all he would only be able to distribute at a flat rate of 12½ per cent. He was, therefore, classifying them in the order of their importance as regards public welfare and housing conditions.

Mr. SKELTON: And financial needs.

Captain RAMSAY: I thank my hon. Friend for that reminder. May I recall to him that there is under the attention of his Department a case of a water scheme at Penecuik which satisfies the two essential conditions which he first mentioned. The housing scheme there is definitely being held up until this fresh water supply can be given, and if the water supply is not augmented and the drought continues, there may be serious water shortage for all persons concerned.
The second point concerns the type of house which is at present being built. I am sorry that my hon. Friend the Secretary for Overseas Trade is not in the House, because I know that, as the Member for North Midlothian, he would bear me out in dealing with the request made to the hon. Member to use his influence in the matter of two-roomed houses. This is no idle statement; my hon. Friend and I have received numerous representations from burghs in Midlothian, and the contention which they put forward for two-roomed houses is roughly as follows. They say that if you divide the housing problem—which, I understand, my right hon. Friend does —into two parts, namely slum clearance and over-crowding, it is essential while you are obviating one problem not to exacerbate the other. I could produce quite a number of cases to prove to my hon. Friend that this is, in fact, what is being done when four-roomed houses are being built regardless of special requirements. In a great many cases, as the hon. Member for Gorbals will confirm, where four-roomed houses are required, it is easy to take out an old couple or a young couple newly-married who can be moved away to a smaller house. In neither of these cases is it convenient or right to put those two persons into a four-roomed house. They cannot afford to furnish it; they cannot afford the rent. What happens? If they are moved into a four- or five-roomed house, the first thing they do is to take lodgers, and within a few weeks you have overcrowding in a new house.
I know that the position is very difficult. We have made representations, and I beg my hon. Friend to use his influence and develop this subject a little more. I believe that a little more consideration by the county council for the local authority is all that is needed. Local authorities, after all, bear the burden and
heat of the day in this matter. They go into these questions and make personal inquiries and lists of special requirements. It is a little hard on them to have their proposals turned down when they send them in, and to be put on a flat rate for four-roomed houses. I beg my hon. Friend to give his attention to this matter.
I wish to speak of another point, no less important, in which I ask the assistance of my hon. Friend. It greatly discounts the good work that he and the Government are doing in re-housing and improving the conditions of the people if we allow private enterprise to let its standards fall below what the Government are setting themselves as the housing standard. It would afford good ground to some of our hon. Friends opposite for pointing to the failure and attributing it to the capitalist system. We who are quite certain that private enterprise, given sufficient attention and good will, is still by far the best and most superior system that mankind has found for his social economy, must make it our duty to see that private enterprise fulfils its task even outside the scope of Government action.
I ask my right hon. Friend to give attention to the state of affairs in a certain mining village in Midlothian by the name of Cousland. In that village there are two blocks of new houses, one containing 10 houses in a single building. These houses have been relying solely on one pump in the street for their water supply, and when there is anything more than slight frost the water in this pump becomes frozen and you have the picture of a crowd of persons standing in the street lighting a bonfire in front of the pump before any one of them can get water. Frequent representations have been made on this subject but nothing has been done. This year the situation has been further aggravated by the fact that, a drain in one of the nearby fields having got out of order, the water has been seeping into the middens and dry closets at the back of the houses. I went round these houses as recently as 10 days ago, and I can assure my right hon. Friend that they are, for the reason I have stated, in no fit condition for persons in this country to live in. I should like to draw the attention of my hon. Friend to this matter, and to ask him
whether or not he could send down a representative from the Department in Edinburgh to report on these houses; and whether, when he is considering further legislation, he will bear in mind the possibility of taking power to bring their shortcomings to the notice of persons who have failed to carry out their housing duties. Secondly, I ask him to consider taking power to compel such people to conform to the housing standard of which he and my right hon. Friend are setting this country and the world so good an example. I beg to thank him for his speech, and to congratulate him on an energetic and enlightened policy.

7.6 p.m.

Mr. LEONARD: I should like to say a word or two about certain activities of the Department to which the Under-Secretary—I know, out of a desire to save time—did not refer. I refer to the part of the report which deals with the food supplies of this country, and especially with milk. There is no gainsaying the fact that this Government has made the problem of milk a national question. I noticed in the report of the Department a very important admission, to which I should like to refer in order to obtain assurances from the Under-Secretary that something is being done in the matter. I am speaking of the question of better veterinary inspection of dairy cattle. I read in the
report:
The Department have continued to press local authorities in suitable areas to replace part-time veterinary inspectors by veterinary inspectors not engaged in private practice in the area of the authority. This policy is now being followed by the majority of county authorities.
I know that the policy is being followed, but I should like to put on record what has already been said by a part-time veterinary person functioning on behalf of a local authority. He states:
'One point that arises in connection with the inspection is that most of the visits are made when the cows are not in lactation or are drying off. The season for milk production is practically from March to September or October, and as that is when there is most private professional work to be done, it is impossible to do as much dairy inspection as is desirable, although I do examine a herd whenever it is possible in the course of private practice. It is unfortunate that most of the sickness occurs when the inspection is most required.'
I submit that that is a very important statement to be made by a person who is
endeavouring to do his best, under part-time conditions. I am pleased to see that the matter is being raised and that the public are taking cognisance of this question, because of the campaign that is now about to be waged for a further consumption of milk in this country. It is also rather perturbing to note from the same report the limited number of county councils at the present day who have arranged to carry out the minimum number of three inspections in a year.

Mr. SKELTON: The minimum is one.

Mr. LEONARD: I read from the report in order to be correct:
The number of county councils who have arranged to carry out the increased minimum frequency of three times a year in landward areas and four times a year in burghs is now 18, but it is to be regretted that several important dairying counties have not yet appointed sufficient staff to attain this minimum frequency of inspection. The annual reports of veterinary inspectors have again indicated the valuable results achieved by the three inspections in the year. Educative work among the milk producers has been greatly facilitated by the more frequent inspections.
The report goes on to give details:
In one area several cottagers' cows were found to he suffering from clinical tuberculosis.
The report then points out that there is great danger lest, owing to the likelihood of mass infection, such cases will cause human cases of bovine tuberculosis. Therefore, I trust that the Department will see to-day that, if the powers they have are not deemed to be adequate to deal with this most important matter of inspection, further power is taken at the earliest possible moment. I feel that if there are at the present time 18 counties already carrying out the increased minimum, it can be further extended by the Department. I hope that modification will take place in the proper direction with regard to this question of the food supply.
With regard to housing, I do not propose to indulge in a general throwing of bouquets concerning what the Government are doing to better the situation. I look upon the money spent on this work as money spent in a productive form. Already the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) has related instances of the meagre sums which are spent on housing in contrast to other activities of the Government. When we
look at the problem and when the Government look at it, we are entitled to demand that they shall look at it from the point of view of the general well-being of the community. If that attitude is taken, I cannot see how the Government, or anyone else, can expect congratulations anywhere, when we look upon the awful conditions of thousands of people in this country.
I am admitting that things are going in the right direction, but, even so, I am positively of the opinion that they are not going quickly enough. I see a tendency of the same kind in the comments that have been made, especially those of a character congratulatory to the Government—including also the Under-Secretary—on the great work that has been done in slum clearance. I am prepared to admit that, so far as Glasgow is concerned, the problem is being considerably ameliorated. It has been improved by two things: first of all there has been a decline in the birth-rate, which is of some assistance; and, secondly, there has been increased activity in building. That, however, is not the whole problem of Glasgow, and, in my opinion, the whole, problem is that which deals with the smaller type of house. There is admittedly overcrowding in the one-apartment house—very bad overcrowding—and no less than 50 per cent. of the one-apartment houses are overcrowded to-day. If that is not a proper picture to hold in the mind, it will be made more complete when I say that in Glasgow to-day we have 38,000 one-apartment houses and that over 50 per cent. of them are overcrowded.
This is apart from the slum clearance problem. This is the problem of settling the type of house that will be adequate to allow ordinary, decent people to have all the advantages that we should have because of our enlightened civilisation. Reference has been made once or twice to a difficulty that if you build that smaller type of house you are spreading your city, and people will have great difficulty in getting to their work. I do not think that is a great difficulty at all. It is a very grave thing that we, in this great civilised State, are unable to allow our workpeople to go out for fresh air after they have been working for many hours in the factories. I look upon this as one of the most important factors of the future. I am not inclined to do any-
thing that keeps them segregated within the four corners of a tenement dwelling. If the Government cannot go the whole way with regard to this matter, there is a mid-way.
I should like to speak of one or two details with regard to the Whitson report, about which there has been no mention to-day. The framers of the Whitson report appear to think that by a little tinkering with the houses which in the opinion of their advisers are capable of being reconditioned, they will considerably relieve matters. I am not of that opinion. Most of the houses pointed out to me as houses which would suffice with a little tinkering, the addition of a water closet or something like that, are houses which in my opinion ought to be done away with altogether. They will only create a problem in the future, and it would be more courageous to deal with the situation on the lines of providing new houses, and catering for the future with vision.
As to the flying squad, I do not like to put a damper upon anyone who is trying to do good work, but hope the squad will confine their attention to explaining to the local authorities what legislation permits them to do and giving them technical guidance. I hope they will not be cheeseparing. From what I have seen of tenements in Glasgow, their construction has suffered in great measure from economies on the part of the Government which I think are a disgrace. Some have fireplaces made of concrete which would be a disgrace to an apprentice. They have put into the living rooms, in which the people spend most of their time, the most awful constructions of concrete that I have ever seen, all to save a few shillings on decent tiles.

Mr. SKELTON: To what district does the hon. Member refer?

Mr. LEONARD: To the district of Germiston. With regard to overcrowding, taking the census figures as a guide and on a standard of more than three persons per room, 29,371 houses were overcrowded, but of that total 28,000 were of the one and two apartment types. On a standard of two persons per room there are no less than 74,398 families who are overcrowded. This matter calls for much more urgent action. An hon. Member opposite made a reference to some de-
fects in Cousland Park, Dalkeith. It was something to do with the water. I can tell the hon. Member that that matter has been outstanding for a long time, I believe since November, 1927, but from information which I have received repairs were started in February of this year. On a previous occasion I incurred the displeasure of some Members who represent northern constituencies by referring to the conditions on certain farms there, and while I do not like to make anyone feel angry I would point out that hon. Members on this side of the House sometimes receive complaints regarding these constituencies which are not sent to hon. Members opposite. I want to touch on some of these complaints which, in my opinion, indicate that there has been a total lack of action on the part of the local authorities. Not only are they not discharging their duties but, when that is pointed out to them. they act in the strangest manner that I have ever known in the case of authorities charged with looking after the interests of the people. In the first place there is no systematic inspection at all. Such inspections as do take place are only incidental to other inspections. An official is sent to investigate a case of infectious disease, and if it is remembered that something has been said about some house in the vicinity he is asked to look into that at the same time, but when his report is submitted no action is taken.
According to the representations submitted to me, large numbers of houses in these areas require attention, and I think the Department ought to take action to inspect them independently of the local authority. The Farm Workers' Union is an organisation of working-class people and these farm workers are entitled to look to that organisation to safeguard their interests, especially in view of the fact that the worker in a rural area, particularly if he lives in a house connected with a, farm, is living in a social environment totally different from that which prevails in a town. He is in an environment where the owner of the property has a more intimate connection with the members of the local authority than is the case in the cities, and the people who live in the houses are under the influence of fear. They are afraid to make complaints. The local authorities ought to introduce a more efficient system of inspection and be more active
in seeing that the statutory requirements are fulfilled.
According to Section 5 of the Act of 1925 and Section 14 of the Act, of 1930 a local authority has power to compel proprietors to put their houses in a state fit for human habitation, and Section 5 of the Act of 1925 imposes upon a local authority the duty of making a systematic inspection of all houses in its area. According to Section 40 of the Act of 1919 it is the duty of a local authority other than the local authority of a borough to require an owner to obtain a proper supply of wholesome water and to introduce it into the house if it is reasonably practicable to do so, and, if not, to provide such a supply immediately out- side the house or as near thereto as is reasonably practicable. It is within the knowledge of the Under-Secretary that the Department agreed to make a test inspection in Berwickshire and Ross and Cromarty. I am informed that a test inspection was carried out in five or six parishes in Berwickshire, and that in no case was a complaint reported to be ill- founded. I would like to know whether the rest of Berwickshire has been inspected in the same way as the six parishes. A promise was also given to attend to Ross and Cromarty, and I wish to know whether anything has been done there, and whether there has been any Improvement in conditions following the long-standing complaints sent to the Department. May I give the House an example of the astounding attitude adopted by authorities up there? It shows that they are capable of exercising a great deal of intimidation over the People. The Public Health Committee of the county of Ross and Cromarty have a stereotyped reply which is sent to all who make complaints with regard to the lack of water supply to their houses:
The Public Health Committee were of the opinion that it was not reasonably practicable to introduce water into the houses or to provide sufficient water closet accommodation therefor, mainly on the ground of expense, and that there will be no hardship when the water has been brought to within a reasonable distance.
There is no effort to investigate the matter, and no action is taken. It will astonish hon. Members to learn that they have actually passed a resolution on the matter:
Regarding the foregoing complaints and others of a like nature, it was agreed to
inform the Department of Health that the committee do not favour the methods by which, in the first instance, complaints are not brought to the notice of the proprietors of houses; that ordinary courtesy demands that complaints should be so brought by the parties complaining before asking the council to exercise their statutory powers; and it was considered that this method would result in remedial measures being taken more expeditiously and without engendering unnecessary irritation.
That is an excuse for not carrying out the duty of making an inspection:
It was further agreed to intimate to the Department with regard to future complaints that the committee will only take notice of complaints made by people actually interested and affected by the subject of the complaint, as they can recognise no responsibility resting upon them to investigate complaints made by outside parties, however well intentioned they may appear to be.
That is an astounding attitude for any local authority to adopt, and I hope that in future the Minister will make them face up to their duties. I heard of a case of one local proprietor who would do nothing in the matter of water supply until he found out that the local authority were prepared to pay two-thirds of the cost. Then all the difficulties of getting water vanished, Officers of the Department made a three days' inspection of certain portions of the country in the north, and assert that the complaints made were proved to be well founded. Again I say that I would like some assurances as to what the Department will do to insist that local authorities do not in future wait until complaints are brought to their notice, because of the special conditions in country places to which I have referred, but themselves take the initiative in seeing that the requisite provisions are made in their district. I have been informed that some time ago the Department were considering the advisability of testing the question of whether they are entitled to insist on water being introduced into houses by taking a case to court. I am sure the Under-Secretary will agree that water is one of the prerequisites of a decent house, 'and I should like to know whether the Department still intend to take a test case into court.

7.28 p.m.

Sir ADRIAN BAILLlE: In spite of the somewhat fiery utterances of the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) and the rather Hitlerite attitude of the hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern)
I should like to pay my meed of tribute to what the Department has done in the matter of slums in the year that has gone by. The hon. Member for Shettleston is not the only one who takes occasion to visit slum areas and go into the houses. In the past months I have also had occasion to discuss housing matters with the local authorities concerned, and I may say that for the most part they are satisfied with the unit grants given to slum clearance houses, though not entirely. In one area, which will be familiar to my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary, where they propose to build 200 houses under the Slum Clearance Act of 1930, they found that, even with the provisions of that Act the scheme would be unprofitable and. a burden on the ratepayers. They are already paying 14s. 6d. in the £, and there are hundreds of them every week asking to be exempted from paying those rates. But, generally speaking, that scheme seems to be working satisfactorily, and we can only hope that when the terms come up for revision they will not be reduced.
I will come to the serious question of the day which has been mentioned by nearly every speaker in this Debate, and that is overcrowding. I can only endorse what has been said by almost every speaker that the local authority cannot afford to build houses to let at a low rental with only a £3 subsidy. It was at first claimed that £3, a year ago, was equivalent to £9 in 1924. I think the Under-Secretary would not regard that as correct now. He must know as well as I do that the cost of house building in England is far lower than in Scotland. We were told, when the subsidy was introduced last year, that it was to encourage private enterprise by literally discouraging local authorities to build houses, except in cases of absolute emergency where private enterprise could not come in. I know that the Secretary of State does not claim that the building of houses under private enterprise has been any more than exiguous. Private enterprise has not even given us the "once over."
The problem of overcrowding in my constituency is as real and urgent as anywhere in Scotland. I have been told that if the unit grant were extended for the purpose of meeting the overcrowding
problem, it might go a long way towards that end, but, unless some such extension of unit grant be made, or unless the subsidy be increased, the local authorities in West Lothian will not put their hands to the building of one house in any shape or form. Reference was made by the hon. Member for St. Rollox (Mr. Leonard) to the "tinkering up" of houses. I would be delighted to subscribe to his view, in many such cases, but I was examining a row of houses the other day about which there was some difference of opinion. My own opinion was that the houses should be scrapped, but there are other houses which could be reconditioned. There is no grant in regard to reconditioning, hut, if such a grant were made to local authorities, considerable economies, both local and national, might be made. The local authorities in my constituency are doing their very best, but they have not the wherewithal to tackle the problem of overcrowding. Reckoning outstanding loans and the deficit on current expenditure, they are out by something over £1,000,000. About 10 per cent. of the population are in receipt of public relief, and 'West Lothian is one of the two counties in Scotland described as distressed areas. In far too many cases, the housing conditions in West Lothian are deplorable. The problem is further complicated in certain areas by the fact that we cannot look with any degree of optimism for re-employment of men, especially in the shale mining areas.

Mr. BUCHANAN: The proposals of the Government provide for them.

Sir A. BAILLIE: We have not yet heard what the Government proposals are to be. To provide employment in that area you would have to employ men to build houses for themselves or for other poor people, and there would still be no opportunity of re-employment for those who are still out of employment.

Mr. BUCHANAN: I understood that the Government had made proposals to put the shale oil industry on its feet, and that they were not just going to let it die.

Sir A. BAILLIE: The hon. Gentleman is perfectly right, but he is speaking of the past and I am speaking of the future. The measures which the Government have already taken have stabilised the in-
dustry to the extent of re-employing one thousand men, and the total employed is about 4,000. The industry at one time employed 12,000 men, so that there must still be a solid wedge of shale miners there who are without an opportunity of re-employment. I was very much relieved to hear what the Under-Secretary had to tell UP about housing and the way In which he said it. I am not like the hon. Member for Gorbals, always jobbing backwards. I agree that the Measure last year was, from some points of view, a mistake, but I am glad that the Measures which are now to be taken by the Department will be drastic, thorough, complete and final. The matter brooks no delay, and I look, not with anxiety but with keenness, to the early disclosure of the Measures which the Department have in mind.

7.37 p.m.

Mr. STEVENSON: Hon Members on this side of the House have congratulated the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary on the work done in connection with health during last year, but I think it is a mistake to accept the suggestions put forward by some of them, that we look with favour on the conditions of housing. I congratulate the Secretary of State and his Department on the drives which they are making with the object of clearing the slums. The statistics which he has produced as to the houses built by private enterprise are satisfactory. I put that forward with two qualifications, one of which is that the houses built under private enterprise are a very small proportion of the number of wage-earners in this country who can afford to pay the rents. I have also certain reservations to make on the congratulations which I offer to the Minister in regard to slum clearance. He tells us that we can now expect that 92 per cent. of the slum clearance houses in Scotland will be removed under schemes at present put forward. Those of us who are familiar with the densely populated areas in our industrial towns realise that a very fine distinction is sometimes drawn between houses which are condemned and those which are allowed to remain.
Slums cannot be cured by demolishing condemned houses. The condemned house is only a symptom of the trouble. If we are to clear our cities of slums we must go a step further. We must look at the
cause of the disease and tackle it wholeheartedly. The cause of the slum area is two-fold. Some people suggest that slums are due to overcrowding only, but there is another reason, which depends to a very large extent on the condition in which the houses or tenements are maintained. The external appearance of a house or tenement may be very good, but if sufficient be not spent in maintaining the house and keeping it continually in as modern a condition as possible, the house immediately goes down in character. I regret that the Scottish Office have not insisted upon local authorities drawing up rules, regulations and bylaws, as they are entitled to do under the Housing Acts, the Public Health Acts and Local Government Acts, setting forth the minimum conditions, with reference to the maintenance and sanitation of houses, below which houses shall not be occupied. That is one of the first things to do in trying to cure a slum area.
Many advantages will be derived from that. We are all familiar with the type of tenement which requires a considerable amount of work to be done upon it to make it habitable. It is impossible to recondition certain tenement houses, but all depends upon the state at which the tenement house has arrived. There are many that could be put into reasonable condition with reasonable expense, perhaps by enlarging the size of the house, turning a two-roomed house into a three-roomed house or taking one room out of the house and seeing that the space is divided up and the house provided with proper lavatory and bathroom accommodation, and with scullery and wash-house. The Secretary of State should consider whether at as early a date as possible he can lay down some reasonable standard as to the sanitary condition of houses, using powers which are in existence or acquiring other powers in order to see that houses are maintained to that standard. If that be not done, it will not matter how many slum houses we clear, because other slum houses will come into existence.
I feel a great deal of disappointment in regard to the small provision which is made for the reduction of overcrowding. It does not matter very much what type of house people live in while they are in overcrowded conditions. Such conditions are bound to lead to a reduction in
health and, in very many cases, in general conduct and morality. I mean by morality not only sex morality but the general mental and physical strength of the people residing in those conditions. The more people there are in a room the less chance there is of individual development or of any attempt at home life. People are driven outside in all conditions of weather and stress, and the temptations which are put before them in our cities in such circumstances are often deplorable. I hope that in the near future there will be as strong and enthusiastic a drive by the Secretary of State to reduce overcrowding as that which he appears to be making to reduce the amount of actual slum property. He has told us that he has representatives of his Department visiting the various localities and giving advice as to what the locality can do under the existing law, and also on matters connected with the structure of houses. I should like him, if he has this staff available—and I suggest that, if he has not, he should acquire the staff—to go one stage further than that. A large number of slum clearance and other houses are being dealt with by municipalities at present, but in rather a spasmodic way, without any plans. In some areas of our cities, houses are being pulled down while other similar houses escape.
I should like to see, even in the centre of our towns, some system of planning adopted for rehousing or the rebuilding of houses there, and I am particularly anxious also that, in the very densely populated parts of our cities, provision should if possible to made, not only for leaving open spaces where houses are pulled down, but for making those open spaces attractive and congenial to the people who live round about them. Often we see in our cities a blank space where the ground is not even level enough for children to play on, and where there has been no attempt at growing trees, or laying out grass, or anything of that sort. I feel that as much provision as possible should be made for open spaces where the people in the locality can sit or walk, and derive some benefit in addition to fresh air. I cannot help thinking that the fact that people living in a crowded area are able to see trees and grass growing, to realise that, while there is a time when the trees are bare,
yet a time also comes later on, in the spring of the year, when they begin to show forth their leaves and flowers, must give to the people themselves a feeling that they have an opportunity of getting into better surroundings, and that, where they are able to do so by putting forth, as is almost invariably the case, some little additional effort in their work, they will have prospects of flourishing as the trees do. I think that that does as much good as anything else in helping to raise the morale of the people, and I am sure we must realise that persons who have been moved from the slums to more open surroundings, where they have their own gardens and a different atmosphere, derive as much benefit from that as they do from the advantages of reasonably good and well equipped houses. While I congratulate the Secretary of State on the drive that he has made in the past towards reducing and clearing our slums, I hope that in the future he will use as much, and if possible more, effort in trying to remove the various defects of our housing system which are the cause of the slums. Otherwise, we shall never get rid of them.

7.49 p.m.

Mr. JAMES REID: At this late hour I do not propose to do anything more than suggest those steps which I think ought to be taken immediately, before the comprehensive Bill of which we have heard is brought in. At the present moment there is, so to speak, a breathing space. Building under the Acts of 1923 and 1924, and under the slum clearance provisions, cannot take up the whole energy of the building trade in Scotland, and, clearly, the Act of last year cannot produce any reasonable number of houses. No one ever expected that it would. The purpose of that Act was really to bring to an end the subsidy provisions which were not satisfactory, and to release the whole energy of house-building for the purposes of slum clearance, with the certainty that within a year or two a further and more comprehensive Measure would be necessary.
Before that further Measure can be drafted one must envisage the problem as a whole. The problem of the slums is a severe, but limited, problem. Overcrowding is just as severe, and much more widespread. But even that does not end the problem. What is required is an accurate survey of the capabilities,
potentialities, and requirements of each area, and the object at which we must all aim is one habitable house per family. I do not suggest that there should be one new house per family, because that is unattainable within a generation. My quarrel with those hon. Members who pooh-pooh reconstruction is that, if reconstruction be ruled out, it is not possible for the building trade to produce enough houses within the next 15, 20 or 25 years, and, therefore, we should be condemning a very large number of people to remain in their present almost uninhabitable houses.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Would the hon. Member be in favour of reconditioning the houses at the expense of the owners, without subsidy from the Government? Otherwise, the expense is going to fall on the Government and the municipality.

Mr. REID: The first thing about which one has to make up one's mind is the work that has to be done in a particular area, and the next thing is by whom the work is to be done and on what financial terms. If it is possible to make the owner do the work without expense to the State, nobody will be better pleased than I, as I have more objection to spending the State's money than the hon. Member opposite has. But, if it turns out that it is not possible to make the owner do it—if he goes bankrupt or something of that kind before he does it—the job nevertheless has to be done, and in such circumstances the State's money will have to be applied to the purpose.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Member again, but this is very important. In the event of the owner going bankrupt, would the hon. Member say that the municipality or the local authority should take over the houses?

Mr. REID: I confess that I object, speaking for myself alone, to the local authorities taking over more houses than they have already, because there are many reasons why local authorities should not own houses; but I have no objection in principle to a national housing board taking over such houses. If the hon. Member thinks that that is Socialism, I give it to him. Personally, I am perfectly indifferent whether a proposal is called Socialism, or Capitalism, or any other "ism," so long as it works. My
own personal view is that in this case there is room for a national housing board to take over a number of these houses and recondition them. I am quite willing to be told that other people have other views, but it seems to me that the main thing is to get the work done. How it is done and who does it are to me rather secondary considerations.
I assume, therefore, to begin with, that what we are out to do is to produce, within, say, the next 10 years, one habitable house for each family, and I think there ought to be a comprehensive survey of each area with a view to discovering how that is to be done in that particular area. We have to start with what is in the area at the moment—the number of reasonably satisfactory houses that do not need to be touched; and I should very much like to see all houses which are at present owned by local authorities thrown into one pool, and no longer earmarked as 1923, 1924 or 1930 houses, because I am sure that in many cases local authorities are thereby handicapped. I would like to see all existing houses, whether owned by local authorities or by private enterprise, catalogued. The second point would be as to the number of houses which are not quite satisfactory, but which can be reconditioned. We ought to have an idea of how many of these there are in each area, roughly; it could not be attained accurately without a long investigation. Thirdly, it should be ascertained how many there are which, within the next 10 years, ought to be demolished. The number would be much larger than the number of houses already condemned for slum clearance purposes, because it would include all the decay that is going to take place in the next 10 years. It has been recommended that no houses should be reconstructed unless they have 20 years' useful life. If a house has only 10 years' useful life, but is not yet a slum clearance house, it ought to be put in my third category of houses which would have to be demolished before we attain the result at which we are aiming.
Then it would be necessary to ascertain the requirements of the area within the next 10 years, and that could not be done merely by counting heads or counting houses. We are aiming, not at one house for so many individuals, but at one house per family, and we know that the number of individuals per family is de-
creasing year by year. Moreover, there may be a larger rate of increase of population in one area than in another, and, in order to ascertain the housing requirements of any area, one must consider the general trend of trade and the general trend of population in the area. It sounds complicated, but I do not believe that, in the hands of skilled people, it would be found to be so complicated as it sounds. Assuming that it is found that there is a certain shortage to be made up within the next 10 years, then comes the really important point—where the houses are to be built. It is no good planting even a new Jerusalem if it is planted at the end of a car-line three or four miles away. Although you may have whole rows of new houses standing empty in the outskirts, you will still have overcrowding at the centre unless you provide there, or within a short distance, sufficient accommodation for those who require to live there, and, indeed, for those who desire to live there.
A great deal of the present overcrowding is probably caused, not by lack of houses taken broad and large, but by lack of decent houses at the place where they are wanted, and I venture to think that no plan will succeed unless it contains very specific provisions for the construction of decent houses in those parts of our large cities where they are specially required by the population. Therefore, the plan would have to deal with the number of houses to be cleared in the course of 10 years, or whatever the period may be; the number to be reconditioned; the number to be built at the centre; and the number to be built on the outskirts, as is done under the present system. It may be found that in certain cases the present system of building has about reached its useful limit, and that we shall have to adopt a different system in order to meet what is now an unsatisfied demand. I hope that in that way the Government will be able to see, before they introduce their new Measure, exactly what is required in the larger and more important areas.
I do not think it would be possible in the time to make a comprehensive survey of the whole of Scotland, but the right hon. Gentleman's flying squad might select one or two, or perhaps six or seven, typical areas of an urban
character, and similarly of a rural character, and they might make a comprehensive survey of them. Those surveys ought not to be made by the local authorities but by the Department in consultation with the local authorities. We have been told by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Caithness (Sir A. Sinclair) that the local authorities last year estimated one sum and that today they estimate quite a different sum. That is inevitable. Local authorities cannot possibly all work on the same lines. They cannot have the same ideas. In order to see the problem as a whole we want someone to work throughout the whole of Scotland with the same ideas in the same way. Who is going to do the work at the end of the day is another and more controversial story, but the man to make the census and to present the problem to us ought to be a servant of the Department and not of the local authority. I hope, before the final details of the Bill are settled, the right hon. Gentleman will have adequate assistance from his own officials in the shape of some such survey of selected areas as I have suggested.
There are arguments in favour of local authorities doing the whole of the work and there is a very obvious argument against it, namely, that the local authorities have their hands full with slum clearance. am not at all sure that, if you put on the local authorities' shoulders the additional task of reconditioning, of building up a new type of tenement it may be in the centre of the city, and other activities of that kind, you will not fail to achieve your object even more lamentably than failures have taken place in the past. Private enterprise can undoubtedly be stimulated. I have no objection to private enterprise receiving subsidies under control if it turns out that they produce the goods which the Government want at a lower cost than they could be produced in any other way. It may be also that some national supervision, or indeed national control, of building or reconditioning may be necessary. It may be that two or more of these methods will have to run concurrently, but whatever the ultimate decision, we have, first of all, to envisage the problem fully and as a whole, we have then to spread the work, it may be, over different kinds of organisations if no one organisation can tackle the
whole thing, and we have undoubtedly to spend a great deal of money, because the thing cannot be done without it. Provided we know we have a workable scheme which is going to put the housing system right for another 10 years, I do not think anyone will object to a pretty large expenditure of public money on the ground that, if not from a mere accountancy point of view, certainly from the point of view of the health and happiness of the country, it will be returned to us many times over.

8.5 p.m.

Lord SCONE: I wish to refer for a few minutes to the Rural Housing (Scotland) Act. That Act has undoubtedly been of the very greatest benefit, and it has enabled many houses whose only fault was that they were somewhat out of date to be put into a condition to house our rural workers in modern conditions. It may be asked why a rural landlord should have a subsidy in respect of these houses. There are several very good reasons. First of all, rents have come down very much, with a by no means corresponding decrease in the cost of repairs and administration, and few landlords, unless provided with a large independent income, are able to keep up their workers' houses in the way that they would like. Only a few days ago a case was brought to my notice of a farm that was re-let at a rent of only 57 per cent. of what it was some three years ago. Next it has to be remembered that, even if the Exchequer contribution is as high as two-thirds, there still has to be one-third paid by the landlord which may amount to a very large sum, if many houses are involved. Thirdly, and most important of all, in almost every case these are houses which are part of the emoluments of those who occupy them. No rent is every received from them, and therefore the owner receives not a penny back for his expenditure. All he gets is the satisfaction of knowing that his work-people are living in really up-to-date houses, and in every case that is a sufficient recompense.
One danger to the expansion of this scheme to which I should like to draw attention is the question of the shortage of water. Not merely are many districts ill-provided with water as far as their present requirements are concerned, but as those requiements increase with the introduction of water into many more
houses, so will their supplies prove even more inadequate. In Dumfriesshire on a property belonging to my family we are beginning a large scheme of reconstruction of cottages. Unfortunately this area is very badly provided with water. It is a special water district, and the supply is outwith the parish. Last year it was not very far short of failure. At the moment it is adequate, but it is likely that it will run very short as the autumn proceeds. If we are to introduec water into a large number of houses, it, means that we are going to increase the consumption by anything up to 25 gallons a clay, which is the usual figure taken. Suppose it is only 20 gallons and assume that each house contains five occupants. If we put 20 houses in order, we are going to throw an additional burden of 2,000 gallons a day on to a supply which already in dry years is hardly adequate. We are, therefore, faced with the unpleasant alternative either of leaving the houses in their present state or taking the risk of bringing them up to date and very likely throwing on to the local water supply a burden which it is totally impossible for it to carry. The district can only get an adequate water supply by means of a very large scheme. For reasons best known, to itself the Dumfries County Council has not made any application for a grant for this district. It is regrettable in view of the fact that the whole area along the coast from Dumfries to Annan is badly supplied with water. This instance is typical of many areas. As far as my own constituency is concerned, I read to-day the annual report of the county medical officer of health. Throughout the county, in places too numerous to mention, there is a water shortage. Again, the problem is going to be brought very forcibly before landlords, who will either have to leave the houses as they are or take the risk of causing a universal shortage of water.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Is the Noble Lord aware that I asked the Secretary of State in how many places there was a shortage of water and the reply was that there was only one place in Scotland, and that was the Brig of Turk.

Lord SCONE: I do not know the date of the question.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: A month ago.

Lord SCONE: A month ago is not to-day. I also put a question a month ago, and at that time the situation was as the hon. Member has stated. To-day it is very considerably worse. The only way in which these small districts can hope to get an adequate water supply is by assistance from Government grants. The county council of Perth is very up to date, and it has applied for many grants, but, to use a commercial expression, the issue of £137,500 made by the Government has already been heavily over subscribed, and there is no chance that the county council will get anything like probably a quarter of the sum necessary. I trust that the right hon. Gentleman will do his best to extract from a flinty-hearted Treasury at least £250,000 for water in his next Estimates.
All Scotland is grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for the drive that he is making to clear up the slums, and all Scotland will be equally grateful for the drive that he is going to make to reduce overcrowding. I am glad to say that the Perth Town Council are showing themselves to be very progressive indeed. They hope that within two years there will be neither slums nor overcrowding. The hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) said one might see unpleasant sights in the way of housing in Perth. That was the case up to a few years ago, but it has now very nearly disappeared, and I trust that in the near future it will be impossible for anyone to see houses in Perth which will not be a credit to the city. I know the town council are doing their best in that connection. There is one point in regard to compensation for slum property. A case was brought to my notice of a constituent, an old woman whose sole income is derived from the rents of some eight small houses. She is doing her best to keep them in decent condition as far as her means allow her. As the income that she derives from them is barely sufficient to keep body and soul together, it is hardly surprising that they have got into a state which can hardly be described as fit for human habitation. If she is forcibly deprived of her property and is only to be given the site value, an injustice will be done and she will be forced to the alternative of starvation or the poor house. It may be very difficult to draw a distinction between cases where an old person is entirely dependent
on rents and others where a person owns a large amount of property and can well afford to put it in order, but I hope the right hen. Gentleman will make some effort to do something for these poor people who are faced with the loss of the small income on which they entirely depend. With almost every one else who has spoken, I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman and the Under-Secretary on the efforts that they are making to improve housing and at the same time to better the water supply, but a very great deal more has to be done, and, if they bring forward a really energetic scheme which will put Scottish housing into a very different condition in the next ten years, Scotland will be grateful to them for evermore.

8.15 p.m.

Mr. D. GRAHAM: It is rather difficult for one to take part in this Debate and to express any feeling contrary to that of good will towards the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Under-Secretary. There are some things upon which we can all agree. Both the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Under-Secretary have been as competent and capable as any holders of their respective offices during the 16 years that I have been a Member of this House. But most loyal supporters of the Government have made it plain that the Bill which they passed through this House has proved to be a failure.
There have been so-called constructive speeches by supporters of the Government in regard to the slum problem. I do not know whether a suggestion which I desire to make to deal with the question of slums and overcrowding will be regarded as constructive, but I propose to put it forward with the utmost sincerity as one deserving of consideration by the Department. The members of the Department and their families should be compelled to live in a one or a two-roomed house for six or 12 months, and then they would get to know what a one or a two-apartment house really means. I believe that it would have the effect of quickening the rate of progress as far as the clearing away of slums is concerned. I would not be at all annoyed if some Members of the Government, and particularly representatives of the Treasury, were dumped down into some of the houses in my constituency where the occupiers have to sit up all night
to prevent their children from being eaten by rats and have to go to work the following day and are generally expected by their employers to perform a good day's work. The people who know best the conditions of the slums are not the intellectuals. The people who are appointed on various commissions to make recommendations to deal with the question usually know absolutely nothing about it, and, in very many cases, lack sympathy.
The slum problem is a pretty severe one. It is not new so far as Scotland is concerned, and Scotland is not worse than England. There are as rotten slums in England as there are in Scotland. Slums are due to low wages. One-apart went houses may become overcrowded owing to the inability of the occupiers to pay for more adequate accommodation. I dare say that the character of those people is as good as that of the best of us. It is not a question of character or of willingness to work or being able to work, or being capable workers, but of not having sufficient income in order to pay a sufficient rent to enable either private or public enterprise to provide them with adequate housing accommodation. It is all very well to talk about private enterprise failing to supply houses. Public enterprise has also failed. None of the public utility societies and none of the local authorities in Scotland are building houses for the men who are unemployed.
There are large numbers of persons in my constituency, and in every constituency in the West of Scotland, living in overcrowded conditions and in rotten slums. Families are separated, the mother living in one house and the rest of the family in another. They have lived all their lives in the locality, and the municipality cannot or will not provide them with houses. If they are unemployed or dependent upon public relief and they go to the town or county council and ask for a house, they have to produce rent receipts to show that they are clear in their rent. I appreciate the point of view of the local authorities. They do not want to let a house to a tenant who is unable to pay the rent. They have any amount of sympathy with the applicant, but they say, "No, we cannot give you a house because you are unable to pay the rent."
This brings me to a point which was raised by one or two hon. Members. It
was mentioned in the first instance by the Under-Secretary who rather prided himself on the fact that the money to be devoted to the provision of water supplies is to be distributed in areas where there is a water scarcity. That is all to the good from many points of view, but I would like to draw the attention of the Department and the Minister to the fact that although we are not suffering from lack of water as far as our area is concerned, we have to pay towards the provision of water for Caithness or Dumfries. Are Dumfries and Caithness prepared to contribute to the maintenance of the people who are in bad circumstances in my area, seeing that we have to pay towards the provision of water? I have lived long enough to know that there has been too much coddling in certain areas at the expense of industrial areas, and it must be remembered that the poverty of our country is in the industrial areas, where the wealth has been created. It makes people not merely Socialists, but Communists, and even worse than Communists very often, because of the experience they have to undergo in regard to this matter. There is only one way of settling it. and that is by the State becoming responsible for the provision of houses. The State is as entitled to do that as it is to provide work. It would be not merely a paying proposition from the economic standpoint, but it would be a paying proposition from every point of view, if we look at it free of prejudice. I am not opposed to private enterprise merely because it is private enterprise. I am not a believer in Socialism merely because capitalism is bad, but because Socialism is a means by which it will be possible to produce conditions that will make life much more comfortable for every member of the community. If it did not do that, I should not believe in it and I do not know any Socialist who would.
I believe that the State should be responsible for the provision of houses. It is a health question and an economic question. A man who has full rest in his house, a workman who has a bed to himself and who gets fully rested after his day's work is an infinitely better workman the next day than the man who has to lie in bed along with five or six others. The child who goes to school out of a crowded home and a crowded bed is under very considerable disadvantages compared
with the children of parents who are in somewhat better circumstances. There will be no possibility of our giving commendation to this Government or to the next Government, even if it should be a Labour Government, or a Socialist Government, unless they are going to deal in a really thorough manner with the question of housing, and that can only be done by providing not one or two-apartment houses for families but a sufficient number of houses to separate the sexes.
There are several questions that I wish to ask. I have been invited to attend a conference, at which I understand there will be a representative attendance of Members of this House. We are summoned to meet in Lanarkshire House, and the subject to be discussed is the subsidy. I do not propose to cross the t's or dot the i's of what has been said by the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan), but I agree with him that if we can spend millions of pounds in subsidising various industries we should be prepared to give sufficient payment to the local authority to enable them to carry out the instructions they get from the flying squad or any other squad appointed by the Scottish Department. In Glasgow, Paisley and Hamilton there is a considerable number of houses in respect of which the local authority will not get the subsidy, because of the dispute that took place in the building trade in which the plasterers were involved, which meant that they were unable to complete the houses within the time specified. Those authorities have had an intimation from the Department that they will not be entitled to the subsidy. If I were a member of a town council and I felt that we were being treated in that fashion by the Department, I should endeavour to get round any instructions that they sent. It is natural for the local authorities to be against the Department if the Department take up the position that, because, for some reason over which they had absolutely no control, the local authorities were prevented from carrying out a certain duty laid, they and the people they represent are to be mulcted in a considerable addition to their rates.
I have the figures from the Ministry of Health Report of the payments made under the Poor Law in respect of the able-bodied unemployed, and I find that
in Hamilton the rates of payments for destitute able-bodied unemployed have increased by 183 per cent. since 1931. In Clydebank the increase is 106 per cent., in Motherwell 450 per cent., in Dumbarton 184 per cent., and in Greenock, the Secretary of State's own constituency, 204 per cent. In Hamilton, Clydebank, Dumbarton, Glasgow, Port Glasgow, Greenock, Rutherglen, Airdrie, Coatbridge, Motherwell and Paisley, all industrial areas, where they have much overcrowding, slums, low wages and unemployment, the local authorities are unable to meet the calls that are being made upon them by the Government. To ask them now to submit to the indignity of being refused the continuance of the subsidy because of failure to complete houses that could not be erected because of a dispute over which they had no control, is not merely unreasonable but is an absolute scandal. I ask the Department to approach the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or anybody who can be brought into the matter, with a view to endeavouring to get them to give us the same privileges that have been given by the Ministry of Health to an English town, to which case my hon. Friend the Member for Govan (Mr. Maclean) called attention to-day.
There is another question in Lanarkshire which is of great importance, and that is drainage. The Department will have representations made to them from Lanarkshire in regard to that matter. The drainage question is somewhat serious in certain parts of Lanarkshire. Lanarkshire is one of the worst distressed areas in the whole of Great Britain, and the rates have increased by nearly 200 per cent., therefore I appeal to the Government to pay some regard to the representations made from that county in regard to this matter and to give them the assistance that will be necessary to enable them to put the drainage conditions in various villages in Lanarkshire in a more healthy state than they are in at the present time.
There is one other question I want to bring to the notice of the Secretary of State. My friends and I met him in regard to a difficulty which has arisen in Dundee over the redistribution of the wards. The right hon. Gentleman agreed that there should be an inquiry, and he appointed Sheriff Blades to hold the in-
quiry. The local people are satisfied with the action taken by the Scottish Office, but, unfortunately, the date of the inquiry has been fixed for the Dundee trade holiday week. Obviously, if the inquiry is to be held during that week it will be impossible for some of those who have been protesting against the proposal to attend, and I am asking the Secretary of State to give favourable consideration to the application I now make, that the inquiry should be adjourned to a later date in order to give them an opportunity of appearing. In our remarks there is no personal reflection upon the Secretary of State or the Under-Secretary of State. Our experience is that while we may not get much, we always get civility, and occasionally the one thing above all others which we want, not merely promises but performances. As far as we are concerned I can promise on behalf of my colleagues that we will give the fullest support to the Government in this matter. If they give us evidence that they really are in earnest they can rest assured that it will be a national effort, there will be no division of parties, but unless we do get something more than promises there will be something in the nature of 'an explosion a year hence when Scottish Estimates come before us.

8.38 p.m.

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir Godfrey Collins): I am sure that no Member of the Government will take exception to the closing words of the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. Graham). All we ask of hon. Members is that they will judge us by our performances, after we have had sufficient time to see that our plans are put into operation. The hon. Member has touched on difficulties which have arisen in certain areas; they were also referred to by the hon. Member for Govan (Mr. Maclean) in regard to the housing subsidy. I have had an opportunity since the hon. Member spoke of discussing this matter again. I have been in touch with the Housing Committee of the Glasgow Corporation, and am anxious to remove 'any doubt or suspicion which may have arisen, and which may still exist, in their minds, more especially as the Glasgow Corporation are bending all their energies to the utmost to deal with their slum areas. I ask hon. Members opposite, as I ask the corporation of Glasgow, to believe me
when I say that I have been definitely assured by the Minister of Health that not one of the Sheffield houses referred to will earn any State subsidy unless they have been completed by the 30th June, 1934. The conditions of approval of the erection of these houses do not affect that fact. That is a definite statement which I make on behalf of the Minister of Health.

Mr. D. GRAHAM: Will the right hon. Gentleman be prepared to receive a deputation on that matter from the localities affected?

Sir G. COLLINS: Most decidedly. I was asked to receive a deputation from the Glasgow Corporation last Thursday, and I replied that I would meet them on Monday last. That date was not convenient to the corporation, but I am prepared to meet them on any date which is most convenient to them.

Mr. MACLEAN: The right hon. Gentleman was present when I read a letter received by the convener of the housing committee of the corporation, and he will agree that it was evident from that letter that members of the Sheffield Corporation were under the impression that a concession had been granted by an extension of the period within which the subsidy could be earned. I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he will state, or if the Minister of Health will state, that no such extension of the period is to be given to the Sheffield Corporation for earning the £9 subsidy, and that consequently the statement contained in the letter sent by a member of the Sheffield Corporation to Glasgow must be founded on a misconception or upon error?

Sir G. COLLINS: I am glad that the hon. Member has raised that matter again, because it is my desire that it should be definitely cleared up. I have no doubt that the person who wrote that letter to the individual in Glasgow was of the opinion that some of the Sheffield houses would earn the subsidy although they may have been completed after the date of the 30th June, 1934. But say here very definitely that not one of the Sheffield houses will earn any State subsidy unless they have been completed by the 30th June, 1934. The condition of approval, and this may be where the misunderstanding has arisen, of the erection of these houses does not affect that
matter. In England, as in Scotland, no £9 subsidy is payable on any house under the 1924 Act after the 30th June, 1934. May I carry the matter one stage further in order to remove a sense of unfairness which exists in the minds of some members of the Glasgow Corporation that they have been treated differently from the treatment of Sheffield. They feel sore, I have no doubt, but I ask them to view this matter with a sense of proportion. About 20,000 houses have been completed in Glasgow by the 30th June with the aid of the £9 subsidy under the 1924 Act; a total annual subsidy, therefore, of £180,000 for 40 years. The number of 1924 Act houses uncompleted at the 30th June, 1934, in Glasgow was 1,474. The corporation will get £3 in respect of these houses if they are completed by the 31st March next. Their incompletion by the 30th June this year means that the corporation will lose £6 per house; that is a sum of £8,844 per annum. My hon. Friend has mentioned more than once that the" corporation should transfer those 1,474 houses, or some of them, to the 1930 Act, and so obviate or lessen materially the loss to be sustained. I think that that is a fair statement.

Mr. MACLEAN: But are not the conditions under the 1930 Act considerably different from the conditions under the 1924 Act?

Sir G. COLLINS: I am not denying that at all, but, if the houses do conform to the 1930 Act, they will get a very good subsidy, several pounds per house, as the hon. Member knows. I hope that that explanation may satisfy the Corporation of Glasgow. I do not want to blunt their edge, and I hope that they will press forward as now with slum clearance in that great city. I am sure that the Committee is grateful to the hon. Member for enabling us to discuss the problem of housing for most of the day. He has raised, as other hon. Members have raised, several problems with which shall hope to deal in my general observations after I have dealt with some of the specific points put to me. My right hon. Friend the Member for Caithness (Sir A. Sinclair) quoted figures relating to the number of houses; but he will remember that when my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary quoted figures they related to the number of houses completed. The right hon. Member for Caithness spoke at
times of the number of houses under construction. Since he spoke I have had prepared some statistics showing the number of State-assisted house completed during each of the last four years. The total for 1931 was 10,600; for 1932 it was 15,800; for 1933 it was 20,900; and the estimate for this year is 21,000, the actual figures for the first six months having been some 12,000 houses.
From those figures of houses completed there has been no setback. My right hon. Friend referred to the difficulties in rural areas, especially the Highlands, and he pressed upon us that the Department should endeavour to deal with uninhabitable houses in the Highland country. I admit that much has to be done, and I can. assure him that the officials of the Department are presently attending to that problem. I hope that before the next Vote comes forward, we shall be able to give my right hon. Friend an account of some satisfactory work in the Highland areas. My right hon. Friend spoke of the cost of building. The figures for the last two years have been showing a slight decline. The year 1934 shows a slight decline over 1933.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: I quoted figures which were given to us by the Under-Secretary of State in the Debate on the Report stage of the 1933 Bill, and quoted also the figures which were given to me only last week, and they certainly show a rise for exactly the same class of house.

Sir G. COLLINS: The figures I have had given me show a decline, but will withdraw them for a moment and make further inquiries and inform my right hon. Friend of the exact cost, the comparable cost with the figures referred to on page 18 of the annual report. From my present information, the 1934 figure does show a slight decrease. The right hon. Gentleman and many other hon. Members have referred to the water supply in their several areas. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary in his opening statement mentioned the four factors which would guide the Department when allocating the sum set aside by Parliament for the purpose. It will not be an easy job to sit in judgment and to allocate this comparatively small sum of money, in view of the vast applications which have been pressed forward by the different counties and areas, but on the
guiding rules which have been enunciated to the Committee the money will be applied to the best possible use.
The hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) made a very powerful speech in favour of dealing in a large and comprehensive way with overcrowding. He asked, what has the State done? I fear that at times the hon. Member is rather apt to overlook the very large effort which the State has made for housing since the War. I do not stand here in any spirit of complacency; far be it from me to do that. I know full well the terrible overcrowding conditions which exist in our towns in Scotland, but I must remind the hon. Member that since 1919 176,000 State-assisted houses have been built with Exchequer money, at a cost to the Exchequer of £17,500,000 already and a larger sum for the future. As the hon. Member drew his picture this afternoon I could not help saying to myself—and I am inclined to think that he will agree with me—that although the conditions are indeed bad in our cities, yet no country has ever made greater efforts for her people than Great Britain has made in the last 15 years.
The hon. Member said that someone should be given power to deal with this matter, to cope with the problem of overcrowding and slum clearance in 10 years. During the last few months we have endeavoured to tackle the problem of slum clearance. If we could be judged and criticised this afternoon for failure to deal with overcrowding, I would stand here in a, white sheet. But I submit to the Committee that if the Government of the day in Scotland were to try to drive forward with all the energy at their command to cope with the two great evils which have existed in Scotland for so long—the problems of slum clearance and overcrowding—they would indeed fail. We felt it was far better to ask the public authorities in Scotland during this year to concentrate first, with all the forces at their command, on getting slum clearance under way, before asking the local authorities to bend their energies in future years to deal with overcrowding.
Many hon. Members have touched on that point. The junior Member for Dundee (Miss Horsbrugh) spoke with truth of the bad housing conditions in Dundee and of the sights which I saw
there with her and other hon. Members. The picture which she drew was, alas, an accurate one and I am glad to think that at a recent meeting between the Dundee Corporation and the, Department's officials the Lord Provost of Dundee on behalf of the corporation gave an assurance that they would build to the full extent of their capacity and that they hoped during this year and next to complete about 1,500 houses to replace these slum houses. I can only say that Dundee would honour itself if it would abolish these slums at a very early date. The junior Member for Dundee also referred to the different types of houses and it is interesting to note that under the slum clearance formula yin the 1930 Act the burden on local authorities in respect of the erection of three-roomed houses, is less than that involved in the erection of two-roomed houses. In other words, local authorities who erect three-roomed houses instead of two-roomed houses under the 1930 Act, have a smaller sum to pay. That wise provision is now in operation and I am glad to do justice to it because it is a direct encouragement to local authorities to build three-roomed houses rather than two-roomed houses.
The hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) displayed that spirit which we know so well both here and in the Scottish Standing Committee. He spoke as a true Scot when he said he was proud to know the rate at which Scotland had travelled on the road of progress and the change for the better in the past 50 years. We all agree with him that further progress can and must be made, but it must have been gratifying to the hon. Member's colleagues from Scotland to hear his direct testimony to the vast improvement which has taken place among the Scottish people during the past 30 to 50 years. The hon. Member for St. Rollox (Mr. Leonard) raised a variety of questions about local authorities and rural housing conditions which I may deal with as follows. The test case to which he referred is I understand going on. With regard to the local authorities inspection, a considerable amount has already been done and we shall certainly consider what steps can be taken to accelerate the completion of that inspection. Several hon. Members have touched on the question of water supplies and various other topics and if
I do not endeavour to deal with those matters as fully as those hon. Members would desire, that is not through any lack of courtesy on my part but through lack of time.
Before concluding I should like to make one or two general observations about the Debate. It has indeed been a very remarkable Debate. Hon. Members from all parts of Scotland have been unanimous in the view that the problem of overcrowding must be tackled with earnestness and a determination to succeed. Government supporters, no less than Members of the Opposition, have this afternoon pressed that case upon the attention of the Government. One hon. Member after another has addressed the Committee, with knowledge, on the conditions existing in their various constituencies. They have, as I have already said, drawn a picture which is only too true of the tragedy of overcrowding in many areas. It is in no spirit of complacency that I stand here responsible with my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary for the housing-policy to deal with these conditions. We have endeavoured this year to deal with slum clearance. In February last the local authorities met us and put forward proposals for dealing with 70 per cent. of the slum areas under their control. In July, I am proud to think, the local authorities in Scotland showed themselves so much alive to their duty and so keen to wipe out this problem from their midst, that they submitted proposals under which 92 per cent. of the slums in Scotland will, if their plans mature, be wiped out within five years. This Debate has shown a burning desire on the part of hon. Members that the Government of the day should interpret the mind of Parliament by dealing with overcrowding next year. That is the object of the Government—to interpret the mind of Parliament on these all-important subjects—but I must ask the Committee to wait until next year, until our plans have matured.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Why wait?

Sir G. COLLINS: For the very obvious reason that if we asked these local authorities to press forward with overcrowding as well as slum clearance this year, the whole machinery would become clogged. My experience in these matters shows that it is better to do one thing at a time. Surveyors and architects have to
be consulted and much work has to be done and by attempting too much at once we might cause the whole machinery to break down. At any rate, for good or ill, we took the decision some time ago that the attention of the local authorities might well be directed to the slum clearance problem this year. It may be that we were wrong but I submit that if we had tried to press forward both matters we might not have had those excellent figures dealing with slum clearance which the Under-Secretary was able to give to the Committee to-day. As I say we made our decision and I am prepared to submit it to the judgment of the Committee. But we realise the determination of hon. Members to force the problem of overcrowding on the attention of the Government. If we did not interpret the minds of our colleagues from Scotland and the mind of our people upon this subject, then, indeed, we should be sensible of having neglected in our day an opportunity of dealing with a great need of the people of Scotland. In view of all that has been said, I now ask the Committee to allow us to pass from this to the next Vote which is down for consideration, and, with that object in view, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Motion.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

CLASS IV.

PUBLIC EDUCATION, SCOTLAND.

Motion made, and Question proposed:
That a sum, not exceeding S.:4,313,185 (including a Supplementary snm of £206,250)be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1935, for Public Education in Scotland; and for the Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh; including sundry Grants in Aid."—[NOTE: £2,600,000 has been voted on account.]

9.4 p.m.

Sir G. COLLINS: I now ask the Committee to turn from the subject of housing to the subject of education. The Vote before the Committee is for a sum of £6,706,935, which is £12,675 less than the Vote for the previous year. As a result of the partial restoration of the cuts in teachers' salaries, there is a Supplementary Estimate for £206,250. Since last year I have had time to meet teachers, inspectors, and representatives of education authorities throughout Scotland, and also to visit many schools.
One's mind went back 30 or 40 years ago to one's own educational days, and what a painful process it was, at any rate for me, in more way than one. How different is the position to-clay. In the first place, our new buildings are a great advance on those of even 20 years ago. We seek for these buildings large open spaces, structures spread out so that air and sunshine may get as much access to the classrooms as possible.
Then, as to staff, the number of teachers is 28,000, as compared with 22,000 in 1914, while the number of pupils is to-day about the same as it was then, some 800,000. The average number of pupils per teacher to-day in primary and secondary schools is 35 and 25 respectively. All teachers in Scotland are certificated, 36 per cent. of them are graduates, and 14 per cent. honours graduates. Thus a reasonably adequate provision is secured of the material conditions and the living personnel. What about the curriculum? This, along with the teacher's personality, on which too great stress cannot be laid, is the crux of the educational system. The object of education, as I see it, is to help our young people to lead useful and enjoyable lives, to equip them for private leisure and life, citizenship, and occupation. Is not that the natural desire and ambition of all parents for their children?
Our commercial, technical, and domestic courses for those between 12 and 15 years of age have been during the last three years made more practical. We have tried to bend the leaving certificate courses away from the academic for those whose interests and abilities are not of that nature, so that the certificate shall meet the needs of those going into the workshop and not be merely a passport to the universities, as it has been too much in the past. Our continuation class system offers an immense variety of suitable practical subjects for those who are already in work; and our technical, commercial, art, domestic, and agricultural colleges meet the needs of the more advanced students. It is sometimes said that the curriculum is too rigid. Is not the curriculum rather a piece of machinery to be used, adapted, and bent to meet the needs of boys and girls? We are constantly scrutinising and improving the programme of subjects and the methods by which they are taught.
I would now like to touch on two aspects of school work—the training for citizenship and the training for physical health. As to the first point, I do not think good citizenship any more than good conduct can be taught as an isolated subject. Information can, of course, be given as to civic and national government, but the real thing is a matter of atmosphere and example. The whole of the school activity should help to create and inculcate a feeling of civic responsibility, a habit of observing accurately and weighing evidence, a sense of fairness, a conviction that, though the State is a corporate body, it is enlivened by individual thought and action. Is not education one of the most difficult problems in a democratic country? When compulsory public education was started in 1870, the sphere of State action in public affairs was relatively limited. How different, as our Debate this afternoon has shown, is the position to-day. There are few sides of human activity in which the life of the individual is untouched by the State, and many of the questions arising perplex and divide even the most gifted minds. Yet if electors are not fitted to give a rough but generally fair judgment on these matters, how shall democratic government be conserved against the claims of those who sigh for a dictatorship either from the right or from the left? As we are reminded by the poster advertising the Pageant of Parliament:
What touches all should have the consent of all.
As to the second point, the nation is deeply concerned with the physical condition of the children. The figures of expenditure on our school medical service are interesting. The expenditure on medical inspection and treatment for the years 1914, 1922 and 1933 were, respectively, £44,000, £121,000 and £172,000—a steady increase during those years. These figures show that, whatever economies have been made in other directions, the health and physical welfare of the children have received increasing attention, and I think the Committee will agree with me in applauding our local education authorities for taking, in a time of great difficulty, this generous view of their responsibilities to the children.
On the physical side of education generally, I think undoubtedly great progress has been made. More time now is given to physical instruction, and the
facilities in the way of gymnasia and playing fields are being steadily increased and improved. The aim, I think, should be the development of a well-grown and healthy race, a matter in which nutrition plays an important part. Although the reports of the school medical officers and medical officers of health have conveyed no signs that malnutrition among school children is increasing, one cannot ignore the fact that malnutrition does exist. I am advised, however, that defective nutrition is not merely a question of lack of food, but may be largely due to the use of foodstuffs which do not produce good bodily structure and resistance to disease. If that be so, as my advisers tell me, consideration may have to be given to the question of instructing our people in regard to what, for lack of a better term, I might describe as "the elements of nutrition." If the people's diet be wrong, steps should be taken in our schools to correct it. Surely it is better to build up healthy children capable of resisting disease than to have to spend money on the treatment of diseases which could be prevented by the use of a proper diet.
I now turn to a matter which has exercised the mind of Scotland during the last few years—the operations of the Endowments Commission. There has been dissatisfaction and criticism. Part of that has been, I am convinced, beside the mark, and I would like at this point to pay my tribute to the energy and ability which the Commissioners, many of them busy men, have brought to bear upon what may have been a thankless task. The present Commission was specifically directed by Parliament to examine, to reorganise, to amalgamate, to modernise. With such a remit how could the Commission fail to cause trouble? Its predecessor of 1882 caused similar trouble, but who, making a calm review of its work, would deny that it brought benefit to Scottish education and gave new opportunity to the clever children? There has been much criticism directed against the bursary policy of the present Commission. But I would point out that, irrespective of the operations of the Commission, the aid afforded by bursaries is now such as was undreamt of in the 19th century. We have to-day the endowment bursaries amounting to 270,000 a year, the rate bursaries amount-
ing to £200,000 a year, and the Carnegie bursaries amounting to £57,000 a year where formerly we had only the first of these.
On the other hand, we must see that the sons of the middle-classes—those who come from the manse, the schoolhouse and the country surgery, of whom we have notable examples in this House—are not denied the aid which may carry them to positions of influence and power for good in this country. I regret that it would be out of order for me to make any reference to the future of the Commission, as that is a question which involves legislation. I would, however, like the Committee to realise that I am fully aware of the situation, and I hope to be able to make some statement on the subject at a very early date.

Mr. MACLEAN: Will that statement be made before the House adjourns?

Sir G. COLLINS: I hope so.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I have received a letter on this question, and I have several questions which I want to put to the Minister. Is there any truth in the statement that the little shopkeeper and the boarding-house keeper and people in that class of life are trying to make Marr College into another dollar institution, where the children of the semi-middle class will go and get the benefits of a fund which was left for the benefit of the poor of Troop who are capable of accepting the education
provided?

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: Before the right hon. Gentleman endeavours to answer that question, may I ask him to leave it to me, because I am in close touch with the situation through the present trustee for the scheme governing the Marr Trust.

Sir G. COLLINS: I think it might be for the convenience of the Committee if I left the Under-Secretary to reply to any question which may be put. We expect that direct questions will be put to the Government in the Debate as to work of the Endowments Commission, and my hon. Friend will answer them. Passing from the Endowments Commission, I want to go back to the question of education. In education, as in other callings in life, competition from other countries is more strenuous to-day than formerly. Other countries are challenging us in the race, and in order that Scotland shall maintain her position it is essential that
all concerned—central administration, local authority members and officials and, last but not least, teachers—shall watch the interests of the children with zeal and determination, and continue to give constant attention to all aspects of the modern problem of public education.
The provision of primary and secondary education is one of the greatest of the public services—inevitably and rightly. In extent and universality it has almost assumed the proportions of a monopoly. Monopolies have drawbacks and I sometimes wonder what would be the result if such education were under a competitive system—if supply had to respond to a demand that was widespread and active, enlightened and critical. While such a picture is merely imaginary, and I am not even dreaming of the competition of private venture schools such as once were common in this country, I wonder whether the proper monopoly in education has not something to learn from the outside competitive world. s there not room in our educational system for self-criticism, consideration of the needs of the modern world in the country as well as in the town, close sympathy between our teachers and educationists on the one hand and those taking part in the manifold activities outside on the other? Fortunately the opportunities for this have been greatly increased by the administrative changes made in 1930 in accordance with the Local Government (Scotland) Act of that year.
It is sometimes said by Englishmen that Scotsmen have a good conceit of themselves, and although there is value in this outlook there is also a risk that we may become too complacent and set in our views and fail to adapt ourselves quickly enough to new conditions. I confidently appeal to all engaged in the great work of education to bring continuous and tenacious attention to the maintenance and improvement of the high standard which has been attained. The modern world, especially the youth of to-day, questions old methods and demands an active outlook and a fresh spirit in education as well as in other walks of life. Every morning the mothers, rising early, send off to school the 800,000 children. With pride and confidence they send them clean and neatly dressed. There is little nowadays of the "creeping like snails unwillingly to school." The
parents surrender their children confidently to the care of our 28,000 carefully selected and highly qualified teachers. It is a great trust, a great opportunity. The youth of Scotland s committed to their care during its most impressionable years.
Finally, let us note that the estimated expenditure from rates and taxes for education in Scotland this year is nearly £13,000,000. In 1914 it was about £5,000,000. The increase is remarkable, judged by any standard one might apply. It is a striking testimony that the public conscience demands the highest standard of education. It is a tangible sign of the sacrifice made by the taxpayer and ratepayer in a good cause; enforced, it is true, but, I believe, contributed on the whole with good will and confidence in the public administration. It is easy to criticise the teaching profession, but the high calling of the teacher is indeed a difficult and arduous one. Not only is infinite patience required but, amid the daily routine, a mind and heart to keep ever in view the ultimate object of fashioning and equipping the children for life. That is the spirit and outlook which animates, I am proud to say, our teachers in Scotland, and it is with that outlook that I beg to present this Estimate.

9.27 p.m.

Mr. N. MACLEAN: In the statement made by the Secretary of State for Scotland, he took advantage—to use the phrase with no harsh meaning—of the shortness of the time that we have at our disposal to discuss this Vote, to leave out any mention of the somewhat obscure situation that has arisen in Scotland over the Endowments Commission. The Committee would have liked very much indeed to hear some clear statement on what the situation in Scotland actually is, to enable them to be prepared, as is customary, in a proper manner.

Sir G. COLLINS: I carefully avoided making any reference to the Endowments Commission. As hon. Members already know, the commission comes to an end at the close of this year, and fresh legislation is required. I thought that if I made any reference to legislation I should not only be distinctly out of order, but the Debate might be led into channels which would not be satisfactory.

Mr. MACLEAN: I quite agree with the right hon. Gentleman, but the point I was endeavouring to make was that if
we had received a statement of things done by the Endowments Commission we might have been able to discuss that matter without in any way projecting ourselves into the future of education in Scotland if the Endowments Commission were to fall into disuse owing to the lapse of time.
Regarding the report which we have before us, one peculiar situation arises. With a great deal of this report hon. Members will be in entire agreement, but there are curious features in it which spring at once to the minds of hon. Members who represent Scotland, and which suggest that everything is not well in the schools of Scotland nor yet among the people who send their children to the schools. In the middle of page 25 of the report of the Committee of Council on Public Education in Scotland, in paragraph 20, there is a table: "Provision of meals and clothing to school children." The figures contained in that statement for three years bring to mind at once the circumstances which prevail in Scotland, and prove beyond the slightest shadow of a doubt—at least to my mind—that notwithstanding all the quantity of praise that is being bestowed upon the National Government, the situation in Scotland is undoubtedly worse to-day than it was previously, and that consequently we have not very much to brag about. The only thing upon which we can congratulate ourselves is that we in Scotland have at least taken it upon ourselves to look more closely after the children and to see to it that, whatever fault there may be in the conditions of the society in which they are growing up, they shall not suffer anything which can be prevented by the schools, but shall be fed and clothed, and so enabled to take the fullest possible advantage of the education we are giving them.
In order to justify the statement I have made, it is necessary for me to read the figures for 1931 and for 1933. In 1931, the number of children provided with meals was 28,801, and in 1933 the number was 35,382, an increase of 6,581 children. When we come to the provision of clothing, there is an even more startling increase in the two years, for we find that while in 1931 the number of children who had to be provided with clothing was 68,943, in 1933 the number was 110,350, an increase of 41,407 children receiving
clothing. The number of meals provided to the children in 1931 amounted to 4,465,300, and in 1933 the number was 6,310,000, an increase of 1,845,000 in the two years.
I submit that these figures alone are a sufficient indication of what has been put before this House time and again by Scottish Members, and that they give the amplest justification for the very strong attitude adopted by most Scottish Members in endeavouring to insist that greater attention should be paid to Scotland because of the peculiar circumstances in which it finds itself owing to the fact that so many of its industries have been, in the phrase that is used in the Press, "Drifting South." In my opinion they have not been drifting South, but have been dragged South. If some of our business men in Scotland had that degree of patriotism which one considers they ought to possess and which, when they attend Burns' suppers and the Bannockburn celebrations they profess to feel, I am confident that the remarkable patriotism which hovers over them on those two wonderful days in Scottish history would prevent such a tale from having to be revealed in the report of our Scottish Education Department as to the poverty which prevails at the present time, and which is undoubtedly increasing in Scotland.
Regarding the statement made by the Secretary of State as to bursaries given to enable young people of ability to go to the university, there to accomplish what may be the ambition of themselves or of their parents, I want, here on the Floor of the House, to take up his observation that "young people from the middle-class must not be denied the assistance of these bursaries." I would not deny them to the children of any class. I would not confine them to the working-class or the middle-class, because I consider that children of all classes are entitled to the fullest education that it is possible for us to provide. The better educated its children are the greater will this nation—or any other nation—be, provided that that education is put to the best use, not used merely in the interests of the individual who acquires it, but for the nation which has provided it. What I want to point out is that in Scotland to-day certain children are being denied bursaries because it has been stated by the education authorities
that their parents are too poor to allow their children to go to a university even with the assistance of a bursary, as it would entail too great a sacrifice by the parents.

Lord SCONE: What authorities say that?

Mr. MACLEAN: The Glasgow education authority is one. I have letters which passed between the Glasgow Corporation and myself when I raised the question with them in one case. At first they refused to give me any reason for their action, but when I pressed the matter and it was remitted by the education committee to the sub-committee dealing with bursaries the whole matter came out. I was informed by one of the education committee that the reason for their action was that the parents were too poor. Somehow or other the Press got information from inside of what was happening. The case was reported in the Glasgow Press and my name was associated with it, because my name had been brought up at the subcommittee and the general committee by reason of the letter I had sent. I had thought that the case I put forward was an exceptional case, but its publication in the Glasgow newspapers brought to me a dozen letters from other people reporting cases in which clever children at school had been refused bursaries because their parents were too poor. If there be a scandal—and I do not say there is—involved in the Marr Trust and in Troon, it is a mere flea-bite of a scandal compared, with the fact that children who show outstanding ability at school are to have the doors of the university slammed in their faces because they happen to he unfortunate enough to be born into a household where the father is either unemployed or is earning too low a wage to provide the necessary clothing and other things which are required, even when a bursary has been granted, to enable the boy or girl—because some of these cases concern girls—to go to a university.
I know that the Under-Secretary made the statement in the Scottish Standing Commitee that, although there was no bursary, education authorities had the right under the Education Act to make a grant. Here is my experience of how a local authority exercises its rights under
that Act. When the matter was being fought out with the Glasgow Education Committee in the one case which I was making a test case, I was approached by several members of the committee. May I say openly, on the Floor of the House of Commons, that I have not yet received from the Town Clerk or the Director of Public Education in Glasgow any official statement as to their intentions or decision in that test case, but I received information from members of the committee whom I know, who came to me. Their statement to me verbally is that they admit that they made a mistake, that they ought not to have come to this decision. Then I put it to them, "Here is a boy who shows outstanding ability and you have barred the door of the university against him for one year. What are you going to do to enable that boy to retain his interest in his studies? Cannot you give him a grant of some kind, so that he can continue attending classes and be prepared to enter the university when the next term begins, in order to receive education for the particular line or profession that he wishes to enter?" I was informed by a member of the committee, when I appealed to them to make a grant out of the corporation's funds, that they could not do that as it was against the law.

Sir R. SMITH: Will the hon. Member tell me what the profession is that the young man wanted to take up?

Mr. MACLEAN: I do not think that is necessary.

Sir R. SMITH: 'But you did refer to it.

Mr. MACLEAN: There are a number of cases concerning young women and young men. If I give the names of two or three of them who want to enter different professions, people will identify the individuals. If any hon. Member doubts me—and I do not say the hon. Member who interrupted me is doubting me—I can produce the letters from the parents and copies of my own letters to the education authority and of the letters from the education authority to me.

Sir R. SMITH: I am not challenging the statement of the hon. Member in any way, but he referred to the boy wanting to enter a profession, and I asked what that profession was.

Mr. MACLEAN: What does it matter? It is not a question of the profession he desires to enter. Their action has prevented him from entering any profession. It is not as though the question had arisen of some profession being overcrowded and his having been told by the adviser of studies "The particular profession you are thinking of entering is overcrowded and with your particular bent I think you should enter this other profession." If that advice had then been refused I could see some point in it. The bursary was not refused because the lad desired to enter any particular profession, but merely because his parents were too poor. That is the point which we have to consider.

Mr. SKELTON: I understand that the merit of the children in question to receive the bursary was not in doubt.

Mr. MACLEAN: That is so. In this case, the lad's ability to enter the university and sit for any degrees which he sought to take for the profession was never a matter of doubt. The whole point was that the household was too poor, and that caused the Committee to say that too severe a sacrifice would be imposed upon the rest of the family if they had to maintain the boy at the university, as an addition to the amount that he was receiving as a bursary. The Under-Secretary made it perfectly clear that the powers which the education authority said that they did not possess are actually possessed by them. I accept his word have repeated that statement to some members of the corporation whom I have since met, and they expressed surprise, because they were unaware of the facts.
Will the Secretary of State or the Under-Secretary be good enough to issue a circular through the Department to the educational authorities in Scotland drawing their attention to that Section of the Act? We have now reached what might be looked upon as the holiday period, when the prizes have been presented and the children are on holiday. We shall soon come to the time when the universities open for a fresh term. The idea seems to be prevalent in the minds of elected members of education authorities —I do not mean merely the officials—that they have no power to make a grant in such circumstances. I ask for the issue of a circular so that it may be said in future that Scotland still remains the
place where the lad or the lass o'pairts, despite the household circumstances, may always find open to them the avenue of learning, and that success in the sciences or in the arts which they believe the universities can provide for them. I ask the Secretary of State to see to it that those conditions are open, and that in the future local authorities shall not deny admission to universities to the capable child in the belief that they have not the power to make a grant.

9.49 p.m.

Mr. BUCHAN: Education is a subject with which I have long been connected, both because of the nature of my constituency and of my own interests. I should like to pay a tribute to the Secretary of State for Scotland for his most interesting and comprehensive speech. Education is an extraordinary subject about which to talk. The counters have been so handed about and so rubbed in the handling that they have almost no impression left. Educational Debates are apt to be like the mediaeval debates upon metaphysics where, within the rules of logic, you used counters which had practically no meaning. Nothing is needed so much as fresh, clear thinking and simple speaking upon this subject of education. A great deal of nonsense is talked and written about it. I have been a pretty bad sinner in that respect in the past. I have been speaking a good deal upon the subject in recent years, and I long ago said all the things that I believed to be true about education and a good many things which I knew to be untrue. So I have mercifully become silent.
The Secretary of State spoke simply and freshly upon the subject. Perhaps that is because his mind is not staled by speaking upon it too often. I specially liked his emphasis upon the importance of personality in the teacher. I thoroughly agree with every word of his tribute to our Scottish teachers. They have been a remarkable group of men ever since the days of John Knox, and to-day they have a very high average of academic attainment and of character. In the difficult matter of the cuts in 1931, they behaved with great dignity and public spirit. It is unfortunately true that the teaching profession has always been unpopular. In the mind of the ordinary, unthinking man there is always a certain prejudice against it and a, certain sus-
picion of it, and it is therefore highly important that those who are associated with it should dignify the teachers' calling. Anything which detracts from the dignity of that calling and makes it more difficult to get the best men into it, is a very real national danger. Before the War, when I was a candidate for my own border county, I was once asked by a heckler if I knew who was the greatest danger in the country. I said that I did not, and I asked him what he thought it was. He replied--the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) will understand the language—that the "dominies were gettin' ower crouse," which means, if I may translate it into a much inferior tongue, that the schoolmasters were getting above themselves. The dominies can well be "ower crouse" in the right sense of the term. They should exalt their profession, and we should enable them to exalt it.
The danger of the teaching profession being in a position where it must always be the object of a good deal of popular suspicion is that it may get into an enclave, or group by itself. It may become like the clerks in the Middle Ages who demanded the benefit of clergy, and who maintained that they were not quite like other men. That would be a very great tragedy. The power of the teacher must lie in his being a good citizen. There was a good deal of talk in the Debate last night about the teaching of so-called civics. I do not like the word, and I do not much care for the subject. I agree entirely with the Secretary of State for Scotland that you cannot teach as an isolated subject the duty and the privileges of citizenship, because they must run through the whole curriculum from beginning to end. The best way of making boys good citizens is to give them teachers who are themselves good citizens. I always rejoice when I find members of the teaching profession taking an interest in public life outside their own line. One of the best ways of getting rid of the inevitable popular prejudice and suspicion is to teach the ordinary man that the teacher has just as much common sense as himself.
Another way of doing that is by making people understand the immense importance of education on the practical side. By "practical" I do not mean a narrow practicality. You must get out of the mind of the ordinary man the idea
that education is regarded as an end in itself, a kind of wonderful picture which we have constructed, and to which we may be allowed to put a few finishing touches. We must make it clear that education is highly practical, and that its only business is to enable people to live a full, a happy, a worthy and a useful life. We shall very soon have to face the problem of extending the school age. I understand that I am not allowed by the Rules of the House to deal with that subject except inferentially—a blessed word. Inferentially speaking, I would suggest that, if we are going to make a success of any such extension, we must be very clear that the right subjects are embodied in the curriculum in the latest stages of this extended education. We must make it clear to the world that this final instruction is directed to the larger uses of life, and to the interests of that wider world which must be faced after leaving school. In framing our curriculum we must remember that, and we must make it clear to the ordinary man, who is to pay the bill.

9.57 p.m.

Mr. MAXTON: I am sorry that the discussion on the Health Vote has left such a very limited time for discussion of the subject of education, not because I think that education is any more important than health, but because it is obvious that there is a large number of Members who are anxious to say a word on education—Members with varied experience and varied political outlooks. It is unfortunate that the House of Commons can only afford one day in the year, or a few hours of a day in the year, to discuss the question of education, which has always been of such very great interest to a large proportion of the Scottish people. It is particularly regettable because to-day we are discussing the Scottish Estimates, and we have just had two very fine speeches, one by the Secretary of State for Scotland and the other by my hon. Friend the Member for the Scottish Universities (Mr. Buchan), who have reached very high levels of educational oratory, but in doing so have got very far away from the Scottish Estimates. That was sound tactics on the part of the Secretary of State, and it was good party loyalty on the part of the hon. Member for the Scottish Universities; but those who sit on the Opposition Benches are more con-
cerned to get at the details of the administration of Scottish education by the Government during the 12 months that have just passed.
As my hon. Friend the Member for the Scottish Universities knows, I followed him, in perhaps the greatest school in Britain, as a junior boy, while he was at Oxford covering himself and his old school with many academic distinctions; and he was always pointed out to those of us who were his juniors as the example that we should all follow. Indeed, this was said to me so often by the various masters that I began to detest the name of John Buchan with a deep detestation, which I never overcame until we were sitting together in this House. Just as I regretted having to follow him in the school, so I regret having to follow him to-night, because no one in this Committee is more easily tempted than I am to get on to exactly the same type of theorising as has been indulged in by the Secretary of State and by the hon. Member. But I am resisting that, and I am going to deal with the administration of education in Scotland by the present Government, as represented by the present Secretary of State and his Under-Secretary, and I am going to enter caveats against the paeans of praise which the Secretary of State for Scotland showered on himself.
I want to suggest that education in Scotland during the year that has gone has not been on the high level which it could very easily have reached. My hon. Friend the Member for Govan (Mr. Maclean) raised one section of the problem, namely, the granting of bursaries for higher education in Scotland. If he turns to the appropriate paragraph in the report of the Committee on Education for Scotland, he will find that, during the financial year ending the 15th May, 1933, the total sum expended on bursaries by the education authorities was in round figures £207,000, as compared with £244,000 in the previous year; and the report states:
The decline points to a somewhat exacting standard in the educational qualifications required in a bursary holder, a change for which there is much to be said.
I regard that as untrue. The fall in the expenditure on bursaries was not because there was a limited number of pupils coming forward in Scotland with the
necessary educational qualifications, because, if the right hon. Gentleman will examine his own report, he will see that a larger number of leaving certificates—the hallmark of the successful accomplishment of a secondary education in Scotland—were granted by his own Department to the pupils coming out of the secondary schools; and yet, under his administration, the amount spent on bursaries to permit of higher education was reduced to a very substantial extent.
The right hon. Gentleman saw fit to introduce into his speech on education homilies to housewives as to how they should feed their children—an argument to which I profoundly object. He argued that, if the mothers of Scotland spent the money that they had on the right kind of food, then the physical condition of the youngsters would be better. I believe that the average mother in Scotland knows just as well how to feed her youngsters intelligently as I know how to feed myself intelligently; and, frankly, I must confess to a very great depth of ignorance on the matter.
When I go into the dining-room of the House of Commons, I look down the menu and choose, not necessarily the cheapest things; but, having chosen what I regard as a meal that will satisfy me, I have not the faintest idea, when I have consumed it and paid for it, how it stands in the order of calories and vitamins and matters of that kind. I see great big, husky men in this House who eat even less intelligent meals than I do, and show an infinitely higher percentage of physical quantity, at any rate, than I do for my expenditure. I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that, before he starts to tell the housewives of Scotland—the mothers of Scotland—how to spend their limited resources in the feeding of their children, he should find out first of all what intelligent feeding is, and that is not known. He is subsidising at the moment a very fine research about the nutrition of animals; he is doing tremendous work at. the Rowett Institute, in the north of Scotland, to find out how to develop the best pigs, sheep, or cows; but he is doing absolutely nothing to find out anything about human nutrition. Research on animal nutrition, yes. Give us the big cow, the big pig and the big sheep. When it comes to the nutrition of human beings, he contents himself with a general homily to the housewives of Scotland.
He himself, as head of the Scottish education system, was responsible for providing 6,000,000 meals during 1933. He is the biggest mother in Scotland. I do not mean that in any offensive sense, but he is responsible for feeding the biggest family. I want to ask him, as man to man, or as father to father, if he has spent two minutes of his period of office examining the menus that are provided in the various school feeding centres, and if, in particular, he has consulted high medical opinion as to whether the meals provided for those 6,000,000 cases are of the highest nutritive value, with the other qualities that ought to go with a meal, because it ought to be a meal that provides not merely physical efficiency but pleasure to the youngster who is eating it.
In addition to being the head of the educational service, he is head of the prison service. The prison dietary is absolutely perfect from a nutrition point of view. The medical experts years ago decided that that was so. Twelve ounces of oatmeal made into porridge in the morning, eight ounces of oatmeal made into porridge in the evening along with half-a-pint of sour milk to help to dispose of it, a point of soup in the middle of a day, and eight ounces of bread—they decided that that was a perfect meal. So it is theoretically. The right hon. Gentleman has freedom of access to all Government buildings. I ask him to go into the newest and most up-to-date prison in Scotland, the one on the outskirts of Edinburgh, not on a casual visit but to have a week's incarceration and see what he thinks of the perfect dietary at the end of a week.
I direct his attention to that and turn to another point in his statement. He talked to-day again about the necessity of bringing manual trade training more into the educational service. Last year he talked about that when he had newly assumed office. He told us he was proposing to send two of his officials to the Continent to study trade schools there. I said I had no objection to officials of his Department having a trip on the Continent. I have never interfered with any man's or woman's pleasure in my life. If it brightened the somewhat monotonous life of a civil servant to have a trip on the Continent, who was I to object to him having it? But I expected that when they came back they
would have some report to present to us, perhaps in tabloid form. I do not want to pry into the whole story of their visit —all work and no play—but so far as they were on the Continent and saw something of trade schools, I think we are entitled to know exactly what they learnt and to what extent what they learnt has been applied during the year that the right hon. Gentleman has kept in office.
I notice that there has been an increase in the number of mentally and physically defective children. That should not be. We have now had a dozen years of school medical inspection and treatment. We have not an increasing school population to deal with. The educational problem during the last dozen years has been tremendously simplified by the fact that the Scottish population has remained to all intents and purposes stationary for a dozen years. There may have been variations of 10,000 or 20,000 in 4,000,000, but that is trivial, and yet there is an increase in the number of mental and physical defectives. I want to make certain that it is not a case of certifying as mentally or physically deficient boys and girls who formerly would have been regarded as suitable for ordinary schools. There is always this tendency that, when you set a particular social service going, there is a tremendous impetus to keep it going and to keep it filled. If you have prisons, you must have prisoners. If you have mental and physical defective schools, you must have pupils in them. I want the Secretary of State to direct his inspectors to be very vigilant and to see that no pupils are being sent into these special schools who could, without harm to themselves, be kept among their normal fellows.
While I appreciate the work that the teachers are doing among the mental defectives in particular and appreciate the benefit to real mental defectives of the special kind of education and the special kind of school provided for them, it is a horrible thing for a child who is very nearly normal to be segregated with those who are mentally defective. I would suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that in this matter he should issue an instruction to his officers similar to the one issued by the Ministry of Pensions in dealing with disabled soldiers always to give the man the benefit of the doubt. In this question of mental deficiency, if there be a doubt, give the youngster the
benefit of the doubt and keep him among his normal fellows rather than segregate him and mark him as daft, because, if that attaches to him, it remains with him through life if he remains in the same community.
We passed an Act a year ago or more about the treatment of juvenile offenders. Under that Measure the old reformatory industrial school system was to go. The general intention of the House when it passed that Measure was to get rid of the punitive idea with regard to juvenile offenders and substitute the educational idea. I presume that the change over is taking place. I am glad to note that the number of inmates in the industrial and reformatory schools is diminishing. Now that the Education Department has a very direct responsibility for the running of those schools, I hope that, in this period of change over from the old reformatory and industrial school system which had a penal conception behind it, to one which is to be guided by educational ideas and objectives, the right hon. Gentleman and his responsible officials will keep a very watchful eye and see that the intentions of Parliament are given effect to in the day-to-day working of these places, and that the inmates of these institutions shall not be regarded as junior convicts being provided for graduation, but as young citizens being prepared for a useful place in society.

10.20 p.m.

Mr. G. A. MORRISON: The subjects upon which I should most have liked to speak are, I am afraid, ruled out in this Debate. I should have liked to refer to the disappointment which many of us feel at the turn things have taken in connection with the raising of the school-leaving age, in view of the statement in another place the other day. The other question with which I should have liked to deal is the undeserved hardship which many teachers who have done Icing and good service are being made to suffer through the cuts in pension having become permanent. I am glad to think that something may be done by and by with regard to that matter. The present Debate happens to coincide with the issue of one of His Majesty's Chief Inspector's periodical reports. I have had very little time to examine it, but it gives a very interesting account of the work of Scottish education during the
period of emergency. I have seen enough of it to be able to say that, considering the difficulties under which work has been carried on, due to the contraction in expenditure, and the hardships caused by long and continued unemployment in many homes, it is gratifying to know that standards have been surprisingly well maintained, and that there has been a less check than might have been expected to the improvement which was in progress before the crisis. All concerned have honestly tried to see that in these difficult times the children should not suffer.
The right hon. Gentleman visited Scotland a little time ago and conferred with members of education committees, teachers and various associations, and I am sure that everyone would be very glad if he would come back again, and come not merely to Edinburgh, but to other parts of Scotland. There are a great many people who are anxious to see him and to talk to him. I am not mentioning this fact as a threat, but as a welcome. The right hon. Gentleman laid stress on two very important things, on the connection between the school and the home, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, between school and industry and commerce. With regard to the first, co-operation between school and the home, it is not a new thing, and, as the Department rightly say in their report, more and more attention has been given to it during the past 18 months. As a teacher, I have never had so many parents consulting me at any time of my career as consulted me during that time. In many instances, these were cases of urgent necessity, the purpose being to see what could be done for the young person leaving school.
With regard to the other case, that of co-operation between schools and industry and commerce, it is a question of increased interest being taken on both sides. Each ought to know something of what the other is doing and what the other requires. While I agree with much that has been urged upon the right hon. Gentleman in that respect, I would ask him to scrutinise very carefully the advice that he gets. The expression "dead wood" is used very often. One is interested to read in the reports the testimony of inspectors that there is less dead wood in the school curriculum than is generally supposed. If our main
object is to turn Out pupils trained to think, trained to understand and effectively to use their own language, to size up evidence and estimate the validity of an argument, then the schools must hold fast to the subjects that have proved their usefulness in training for those purposes. I will mention a case which came to my notice a good many years ago. The headmaster of a school well known to me arranged a commercial course in the days when that was not so common in secondary schools. The Scottish Education Department sent two members of the local chamber of commerce to inspect the students who were following that course. They made a report, which was sent by the Department to the school as part of the school report for the year. In that report were these words:
This course provides for two hours per week to be given to history. Why is this? There is no money to be made out of history.
That is an extreme example, but it is the kind of thing that I have in mind when I ask my right hon. Friend to scrutinise very carefully the advice that he gets from some sources. I agree with my distinguished colleague the Member for the Scottish Universities (Mr. Buchan) as regards a narrow curriculum of what is known as practical work. We must never forget that the pupil has to receive some training for leisure as well as for work. I agree also that a little more elasticity might be brought into the curriculum of the higher schools. That process is going on and has been going on for some time, and more and more alternatives are being provided to secure the elasticity of which I speak. It is said that self-criticism ought to be the duty of those engaged in education. Scotland has been the first country in the world, so far as I know, to set up a National Research Council on which there are represented not only people actually engaged in the work of teaching, but administrators, school medical officers, representatives of uniersities, training centres, and so forth. I have no doubt that the old country will be paid the compliment of imitation in this respect before long.
There is a brief reference in the report to the question of nursery schools. This is a matter in which I have taken an interest since my instantaneous conversion about 15 years ago when I visited Miss Macmillan's school at
Deptford. One hopes there will be a great expansion of that service in Scotland. I learn that there are 19 nursery schools, only two of which are provided by public authorities, with some 611 pupils in attendance; there ought to be many thousands. These nursery schools have beneficial effects socially in the formation of good habits, and we have the testimony of those concerned in infant and elementary schools as to the marked and rapid progress which pupils who have been in nursery schools make when they go to the ordinary schools. Expenditure in that direction would be remunerative; it would give a return far beyond what many people expect.
One of the problems of the immediate future in our elementary schools is how to extend something of the joy which we have managed to bring into our infant schools into our elementary schools. This is due largely to the introduction of improved and enlightened methods, and there are some signs in the report that these newer methods are being spread upwards in the schools. Undoubtedly there has been a great improvement in the spirit of education in our elementary and secondary schools, due partly to the fact that teachers have taken a wider conception of their social duties. One has only to mention such things as school journeys, school clubs, musical societies, scout clubs; and 1934 is going to be memorable for the establishment of a hostel in Scotland for school children, where children with their teachers can spend, and are spending, happy and healthful week-ends. It is due also in some measure to an improvement in the relations between inspectors and teachers. The inspector is now often welcomed as a consultant and co-worker, not dreaded as an inquisitor. All this is welcome. If the teacher is to do his best he must be free—and the best teachers regard it as a great privilege—to use his awn subject, any subject, in order to foster in his pupils an interest in the things of the mind, to provide them with interests which will be a possession for ever and a lasting joy, to supply them with ideas which will enable them to lead useful, full and happy lives.
It is one of the most pleasant experiences of teachers to find long after pupils have left school, some of them recalling little things that he has said or done which have set some of them going
on fruitful paths. Like bread cast upon the waters, it comes back after many days. A previous speaker has referred to the personality of the teacher. Someone has been unkind enough to say that that phrase is well on the way to becoming a catchword. I hope, however, that is not going to prevent us from speaking about it, because it is the one thing of importance. We talk about the environment of young people in schools, about equipment and apparatus, about methods and text books, but we must never forget that for many pupils the teacher is the environment. It is vitally important that he should be able to retain his humanity. When the hon. Member for the Scottish Universities (Mr. Buchan) was speaking on this subject I could not help thinking of the terrible remark made by a headmaster in one of Mr. Kipling's novels:
Never again will I forget that a schoolmaster is not a man.
The teacher has to strive to retain his enthusiasm, and enthusiasm cannot be created by legislative or administrative action, although much can be done by these means to ensure that the capacity, the energy and the devotion of teachers and pupils shall have the most fruitful and beneficent outcome that is possible. n that connection should like to offer a suggestion to the Secretary of State. One thing that seems to me most likely to bring about improvement in education, realising as I do the importance of the teacher, would be to secure peace and stability in the matter of salaries, some freedom from the irritation of constant salary changes. When was going round Scotland four years ago found in one area that there had been no fewer than four salary cuts in about four years. That kind of thing is not calculated to feed the undying fire. It might be considered whether the time has not come to set up some national negotiating body on the lines of the Burnham Committee in England, composed of teachers and education committee members, with a neutral chairman. I should be glad if the Under-Secretary, who is to reply, could find it in his heart to say that that could be done.
I am encouraged to mention one of the newer developments in education referred to in the report. I do so because within the last month no fewer than three hon.
Members have asked what is being done in the way of broadcasting in the schools of Scotland. I have been asked these questions: Can you get anything like good reception? Otherwise broadcasting is no good. Another question is: Do the British Broadcasting Corporation take educationists with them in this matter, or have they just thrust themselves into the schools? I wish to say, as one closely connected with school broadcasting from the outset, that the National Sub-Council contains representatives of the Scottish Education Department, teachers, administrators, directors of education, and others. The separate subject committees contain many teachers and inspectors. These committees prepare courses and pamphlets, which are issued at the beginning of the season, and more recently synopses of separate lessons have been available. There is no intention of superseding the teacher; everything is done to obtain the co-operation of the teachers so that these lessons may have the best possible effect. I am not so well acquainted with the use of the cinema, which is also mentioned in the report, but it seems to me that both these things have proved their claim to further experimentation, so that we may see what can be got, what contribution these newer methods can be made to make, to the work of education.

10.35 p.m.

Mrs. SHAW: The period of the last two years has been a trying time for education but the report presented to us to-night, like the report presented last year, reveals the fact that in spite of the reduction in the grant the fabric of education remains unimpaired. Unlike the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) who suggested that the Secretary of State ought to go to prison, I am going to ask the right hon. Gentleman to accept my congratulations on the statement which he has given to the Committee. It shows the steady progress of education in Scotland. One of the features of that report is the fact that the attendance has reached what we may call the high-water mark, which would indicate, at any rate, that the health of the children has been good. In this connection I should like to pay a, tribute to the teachers. For many years it has been my privilege to know intimately many of the teachers in Lanarkshire and
I can speak in the highest terms of the great interest which they take in ail aspects of their pupils' lives and of the assistance which they are able to render to the medical officers in connection with the inspections of the schools. The teachers have come to realise that a knowledge of the home conditions of the children is helpful to them in their work. Many teachers keep in close touch with the parents of the children and visit their homes regularly and the knowledge thus gained is an enormous help to them in their school work. It also guides them as to the extent and character of the tasks which are given to the children to be done at home.
I do not propose at this late hour when others wish to speak to go into the pros and cons of the question of home lessons but, if we are agreed, as I think most of us are, that a certain amount of homework is necessary to encourage and develop self-reliance and concentration, we must also be agreed, that unless there are suitable conditions in the home for doing the homework, its value must be greatly decreased. I have for many years made a close study of this question. My interest in it arises from a, personal experience which, with the permission of the Committee, I will relate. When visiting a demolition area I came across a child of 13 doing exercises in the home where she lived with her father and mother and several other young children. The child had cleared one end of a table, which was littered with all sorts of stuff and with the light of a paraffin lamp was doing her homework. A gramophone was playing in the house next door and outside on the pavement there was a man playing a melodeon. The child was trying to do an algebra exercise. Reflecting on that scene I asked myself what is the meaning of the word "education." It is difficult to define, but my idea of education is that which is left to us when our schooldays are over, and when, possibly, we have forgotten a great deal of what we learned at school. It is the foundation which should remain to us on which to build in after life.
I venture to suggest that under the conditions I have described, algebra would not provide a, good foundation on which that child could build afterwards. I would be the last to suggest that the child should be denied instruction in algebra but I submit that that child, and
many similar children, could more profitably devote their time to learning domestic science. I know the difficulties and I know that to develop the teaching of domestic science may cause expenditure. I am not advocating high expenditure on centres, but merely the replacement of itinerant teachers by permanent teachers of domestic science. Many domestic science centres are taxed to their fullest capacity, but, on the other hand, there are some of them which are only used one day a week, because of itinerant teachers, and I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that he might make the suggestion to local authorities that the itinerant teachers in these cases be replaced by permanent teachers and so allow of the centres being used, not one day a week, but every day. The benefits from further practical instruction would far outweigh any expenditure involved. We should inculcate in the minds of these potential mothers of the country the idea that the real centre of women's activity is the home. We should instil in their minds that the guiding and guarding of the infant steps of the children is woman's prerogative in the State.
I want now to turn to pages 31 and 32 of the report, to the question of mechanical aids to learning, which has already been mentioned by the hon. Member for the Scottish Universities (Mr. G. A. Morrison). I am not denying the fact that music, art, it may even be speech or voice production, may have a cultural effect on the pupils, but I believe that, if wireless has a contribution to offer, so has the listener, and in that connection I say that for adult education broadcasting can serve a very useful purpose, where discussion groups may be formed and study circles established, and where a listener, being stimulated by the talk to which he has listened, goes to a, library, as the soldier would go to the armoury for his weapon, and there pulls out a book of reference relative to the talk he has heard, and goes back to his study circle and discusses it with the group. That, I would say, is the real educational value of broadcasting, but with an already overcrowded curriculum in the schools I cannot convince myself that it is of real educational value. I am not condemning it, and I will await with interest next year's report of the real educational value of this service.
One final word on the visual aids to learning. There, I think, we shall have a great deal more help, and I hope the day will come in the near future when we shall have a development of films of motion study of the workers at their work, operating in factories, it may be at the benches or in the workshops, and have screen and projector showing these things in the schools. should also like to see committees of teachers, parents, and industrialists, meeting together and pooling their ideas, industrialists getting to know better the work of the schools and teachers better to appreciate the needs of industry. A community can only hold together with the co-operation of all its members, and so only by the pooling of ideas and co-operation shall we build a sound foundation for our educational system.

10.43 p.m.

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: There are so many facets of this great question and there have been so many considerations advanced in the fascinating and very thought provoking analysis by the Secretary of State, that one could talk on this subject for hours, but there is no time to-night, and I must confine myself to two of the most vital sides of the discussion; but before doing so I would like to recall to the Under-Secretary of State this matter of "cuts." As we know, Parliament decided in its wisdom to restore 50 per cent. of the cuts in the teachers pay, but this has not been carried out in some counties in Scotland, and trust that the influence of the right hon. Gentleman and the Under-Secretary of State will be devoted towards inducing education authorities and county councils to put that matter right without delay.
There are two other subjects that I wish to mention, and one is the question of the Marr Trust, which has already been referred to. I congratulate the Under-Secretary on the settlement of that difficult problem. For three and a half years that great school has remained open, completely equipped and ready in every way but without pupils. We all know the reason why it has remained empty of pupils, because of the intervention—the no doubt well-intentioned in tervention—of the Educational Endowments Commission. Owing to the tact and ability of the Under-Secretary and
the right hon. Gentleman, the matter is now settled. The Marr Trust has been restored to the control of the people whom Mr. Marr intended should control it, and the facilities of the school have been made available to the children of Troon for whom Mr. Marr intended they should be available.
Three things will happen now. The poor children of Troon will get a free education from the secondary stage up to the university stage. The other children resident in the neighbourhood who may be handed over by the County Council Education Authority to the Marr College will get a free education from the elementary stage to the university stage. The outsiders who are non-residents will pay. That was the intention of Mr. Marr and that is the intention that will be carried out. With regard to the future of the Educational Endowments Commission am not going to suggest any legislation, for it is not in order in this discussion, but will throw out a couple of suggestions to my hon. Friend as to how this matter should be treated. I do not believe that there is any desire in Scotland that this Educational Endowments Commission should be brought to an end at the end of this year, but I believe there is a feeling that its activities and powers should be somewhat restricted. Marr College has been an unfortunate example of the intervention of the Educational Endowments Commission, and I believe it to be the general feeling of Scotland that something should be done slightly to curb or restrict its power or to give to the Secretary of State or to some other authority an overriding influence or power against the decisions of the commission. I have heard it suggested that it should he continued in an advisory capacity. I do not agree with that, for it would be a slap in the face for a body of distinguished gentleman who have rendered great service to Scotland and to education in Scotland.
I suggest therefore that it should be retained in its present capacity, with possibly an appeal against its decisions by either the Education Department or the aggrieved body, whoever it may be, to say, the quarter sessions. That would convince the people of Scotland that, whatever the Educational Endowments Commission might decide, there would still be the right of appeal against decisions which in their opinion might be
hostile to the interests of the children of Scotland. At present the Educational Endowments Commissioners can intervene in any will made after 1920. That is too recent. It has been suggested that the period should be put back to 1910. I do not think there is any peculiar benefit about 1910, but I think there is a period after which their activities might be stopped. That is from the period when the War started in 1914. The whole of the mentality of the country was changed by the advent of the War. We started to live in a different age after the War, and therefore I suggest to the hon. Gentleman that in the future discussions on this problem of the future of the commission he should consider restricting its powers to all wills drawn up after 1914, and that he should also give a right of appeal from their decisions.

10.49 p.m.

Mr. SKELTON: Before I deal with the points that have been raised, I would say that I propose to continue this Estimate on Friday, and if I rise now it is because I am not certain how long the other two Estimates may take. If there is time after further discussion on the Education Estimates and any questions of moment are raised in the continued Debate, I will ask for a moment or two in which to answer them then. I think it will be convenient if I spend the few minutes at our disposal now to answer the points that have been raised, although I know I am cutting out more than one Member who has, I am sure, some interesting points to contribute to the Debate.
The hon. Member opposite raised again, most properly, the question of the local authority which does not use its power to give a meritorious scholar a bursary on account of the poverty of his parents. I say now, at the end of the Debate, what I said on a less relevant occasion, that as far as the advice and counsel I receive go, the Education Act, 1918, gives local authorities full powers to render whatever assistance is necessary, and that the assistance is to be given under special consideration of the circumstances, not only of the scholar, but also of the parent. I hope that this statement, made authoritatively in this place, will be sufficient information to education authorities of their powers, if indeed any are in ignorance of them. I will
consider whether it is necessary to supplement what I now say by a circular, but I am sure that my right hon. Friend will not hesitate to issue a circular if it seems that there are still any dark places so far as knowledge is concerned. That was the main question raised by the hon. Gentleman, although he dealt with some other points. I will not say anything about the speech of my colleague in the representation of the Scottish Universities except to say that I greatly admired his speech and thought that his admonition against the tendency, which I believe we all have, to talk nonsense when we talk about education is one which, as Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, is ever present in my mind. There is no topic upon which it is more difficult to make any generalisation of any value at all than the topic of education.
It is not, however, my task at the moment to make generalisations, but to deal with the comments of hon. Members. The hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton), whose contribution to the Debate delighted us all as usual, drew the attention of my right hon. Friend to the fact that the report showed that the amount expended on bursaries and scholarships had fallen from £440,000 to £407,000. The decision to give bursaries and the actual amount spent on them is entirely a matter for the education authority.

Mr. MAXTON: The local education authority has during the last two years been facing this question of bursaries as it has had to face every other.

Mr. SKELTON: It is perfectly true that the education grant for Scotland, like the money available for all public services since 1931, has been conditioned by the state of the national finances. I entirely agree with the hon. Member. But the actual use of the money put at the disposal of the education authority is in the matter of bursaries one entirely for themselves. The hon. Member then raised extremely interesting questions on two points, the first of which concerned the old reformatory and other schools which are now called approved schools. He is afraid that some penal quality may still cling to them. My information is that this is not the case. I was nevertheless much interested in what he said, and I propose to make separate investigations as to exactly what is the atmosphere and
quality of these schools. We are in complete agreement with him as to the undesirability of that penal quality, and I trust that, as my information leads me to believe, it is now entirely gone.
With regard to the question of defective children, he spoke of the increasing number of them and suggested, with my full agreement, that nothing could be more lamentable if it indicated an increase in the number of marginal cases taken into special schools. According to my information, however, there is nothing to lead one to suppose that the increase in the number means that more marginal cases are being taken into the special schools. It may be, rather, that there is a more careful and scrupulous analysis of the nature of the defects; and on the general proposition I would suggest that where there is any real defectiveness it is all to the advantage of the child to have special school treatment. I would not accept it as a general proposition that it is all to the bad for a child to be sent to a special school, although I agree with what was said about the marginal cases. The hon. Member also raised an interesting point with reference to meals for school children. On the whole we are satisfied with the menu of the meals, which, I understand, is supervised mainly by the medical officers of the local authorities, but I agree that the point is a most interesting one and I shall look into it further at the earliest possible opportunity.
My other colleague in the representation of the Scottish Universities made an interesting speech and one which, I am sure, convinced the House of the value of the contributions he will make to our education Debates. He raised one specific point of great importance. As I understand it, he threw out the suggestion that the education authorities and the teachers should come together for the purpose of framing some general scale of payments of teachers in Scotland and invited me to express our view upon that suggestion. Our view is that if the education authorities and the teachers come to some common decision on that matter we shall regard it as of great interest; but he will recollect that in Scotland the only function of the Department with regard to salaries is the statutory one of seeing
that the national minimum scale is being paid in each case. Still it would be a most interesting thing if the education authorities and the teachers came together and discussed this question and could come to some agreement about salaries.
My experience of the study of the subject of education in Scotland since I have been in my present post leads me to suppose that the fresh air of thought is constantly being applied to it. A great deal has to be done. As I see it, we are really in the early stages of applying a new method of education and I would crystallise that method in this sentence: it is a method by which education seeks to open doors and not to close them, to develop character, to develop powers, to stimulate the natural eagerness and curiosity of the mind of the young and not to put it in the strait waistcoat of an orthodox and sterotyped method of learning and subjects of learning. I see on all sides a loosening of the bands of the rigid outlook; and that is all to the good and the results are interesting. I think it is already clear that the people of Scotland are becoming not a less educated nation but a more educated nation. Had I time I would draw attention to the remarkable figures in the last report as to the increase of the use of school life, and all that kind of thing, but I hear the clock strike and other questions must be deferred to the next occasion.

Mr. MACLEAN: rose—

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: Is it possible for Members who have spoken before—

The CHAIRMAN: Order.

It being Eleven of the Clock, The CHAIRMAN left the Chair to make his Report to the House.

Committee report Progress; to sit again To-morrow.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

ADJOURNMENT.

Resolved, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Captain Margesson.]

Adjourned accordingly at Two Minutes after Eleven o'Clock.